EZEKIEL
and YHWH’s
Judgment
for the
Good News
PEOPLE
VOLUME X
The Jewish Paradox
EZEKIEL and YHWH’s
Judgment for the
Good News People
Volume X--The Jewish Paradox
by
an unworthy servant
And you shall know the truth,
and the truth will make you free.
(John 8:32)
Common Law Copyright, 2003 & 2005 CE, an unworthy servant, Calder, Idaho. The author claims his Right of exclusive ownership and control of this publication, the fruit of his labor, as a matter of Intellectual Property protected by the Laws of YHWH and as guaranteed by the US Constitution for the United States. Permission is granted to quote provided appropriate credit is cited together with the Publisher’s web site name and postal mailing address––WWW.AgeEnd.Com PO Box 473, Calder, ID 83808, USA.
Contents
Volume X--The Jewish Paradox
CHAPTER PAGE
- Cover Page 1
- Title Page 2
- Contents 3
- Publisher’s Preface 5
Part DD--The Jews
139 Some Jewish Problems 6
140 The Edomites 12
141 The Khazars 24
142 More Edomite Definitions 30
Part EE--The Amalekites
143 The Amalek-Edomites 43
144 Jewish Views on the Amalekites 56
145 Coming Edomite Judgment I 69
146 Coming Edomite Judgment II 81
Part FF--First Century CE Jews
147 Jewish Sects in the First Century I 90
148 The Hillel Pharisee YESHUA 101
149 Jewish Sects in the First Century II 109
150 Murderers of the Righteous 115
151 The Kayin Presence 131
152 Amalek-Edomite Religion I 145
153 Amalek-Edomite Religion II 155
SHEERIT YISRAEL
PO Box 473
Calder, Idaho 83808, USA
Publisher’s Preface
Greetings! The following presentation is volume ten of a 36-volume production of some 6,000 pages on “Ezekiel and YHWH’s Judgment for the Good News People,” all of which is on the Internet at the www.AgeEnd.com web site.
This overall effort provides an interpretation of the Good News message in the New Testament, its linkage to the book of Ezekiel, and an application of both to the age-end prophecies relating to certain nations and peoples now out in the world. In order for this single volume to be understood and comprehended, it is imperative that the study be read from its beginning--from page one of volume one.
Anyone trying to read this volume or the study’s 6,000 pages at any mid-point will end up in a state of confusion without having read and digested the preceding material. It is crucially important that this work be read in sequence from its beginning--otherwise, the reader will almost certainly end up missing the essence of the message!
The effort was originally set on a Macintosh computer with Microsoft Word 6.0.1. It was set in Helvetica, 12-point type (18 pt on chapter headings); single line spacings; and margins: left 1.2”, right 0.8”, top 0.7”, bottom 0.8” and footer 0.6” (for page numbers).
For further information on obtaining this study in 18 computer floppy disks (IBM-formatted, high density, 2HD, 1.44 MB, 3 1/2 inches); in a single CD-Rom; or in hard copies (when the Internet or a compatible computer is not available); please write the publisher at the above address and send a stamped, self-addressed, long (legal-size), return envelope.
With a CD-Rom or computer floppy disks, the study is readable on Macintosh (systems 5.0 and later) or IBM/compatible (with Microsoft Word-Windows) personal computers. May The Great CREATOR and SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE bless you as you study His word to learn His will and to obey Him. Shalom (peace) to you and yours!
an unworthy servant, Hanukkah 2003 CE
Chapter 139--Some Jewish Problems
The Issue
Previous chapters addressed the question of YESHUA’s great commission to the lost House of Yisrael, and seemingly, His complete by-passing of the Jews. Therein, the question was raised on why YESHUA might could have by-passed the Jews. For that assessment, the following chapters will offer some ideas.
Some of the possible reasons on why He by-passed the Jews were briefly highlighted in the preceding chapter. But they deserve further explanation. One of the points made is that there could be some question about the genetic, racial and/or ethnic make-up of the Jews of Second Temple days which may have impacted upon YESHUA’s commission. This and succeeding chapters will pursue that possibility.
The Canaanites
Many students of the Word and world history are aware of the fact that the line of Yehudah was one of the worse to illegally miscegenate with the nokri/nekar peoples (described earlier) of Canaan land in ancient days. From the very beginnings of the line of Yehudah, one of his important sons was a man named Shelah, whose mother was a Canaanite woman named Shuah, as noted earlier (Gen 38:2, 5).
On this mention of Shelah, there are some good Scriptural reasons to believe that it was mostly his line who lived in the immediate Jerusalem area and who provided much of the population (not all, but most) that eventually met their fate in the Babylonian conquest, as pointed out in the previous comments (Num 26:20; I Chron 4:21-23).
If so, it seems plausible that many of the Yehudim descending from Yehudah's sons Zerach and Peretz (via Tamar) were probably not nokri/nekar racially at that time (Jubilees 41:1-2 indicates that Tamar was a Shemite descendant of Aram-- “The Two Seeds of Genesis 3:15,” 1994 ed, p. 234).
Many of the descendants of Tamar may have missed the Babylonian exile as they probably left the land voluntarily or went into Assyrian bondage with the deported House of Yisrael (I Chron 2:3). Consequently, it might well be that some of the racially more acceptable Yehudim split off from most of the racially mixed Yehudim at a very early time.
But with Shelah's ancestry, it perhaps was natural that in Canaan land, from the later kings on down, many of the Yehudim chose to illegally intermarry with the local nokri/nekar peoples (Jud 3:1-8; Ps 106:34-35; Isa 3:8-9). The previous remarks on Uriah and Bathsheba illustrated this point.
Having brought up this matter of the Canaanites, it should be understood that this is a broad term which essentially was used in the Book in the context of referring to the racial descendants of Ham and Canaan, the fathers of a number of peoples--Sidon, Heth (the Hittites), the Jebusites, the Amorites, the Girgasites, the Hivites, the Arkites, the Sinites, the Arvadites, the Zemarites and the Hamathites (Gen 10:15-19).
On entering the land of Canaan, YHWH commanded the Israelites to kill all of the Canaanites, including men, women and children, as previously discussed (Deut 20:17). But the Israelites, under Yehoshua and later, stupidly refused to obey The MOST HIGH and allowed some of them to remain alive in the land (Josh 9:3-18; Jud 1:27-36).
Once some of the Canaanites were allowed to stay in the land, the Israelites began miscegenating with them, as the Scriptures conclusively establish. While this reality took place, these interracial marriages were illegal, per The ELOHIM’s Word, as has been shown in previous chapters in this production.
The Kenites
Additionally, at a very early time, some aliens called Rechabites became linked to and genetically commingled with the tribes of Yehudah and Binyamin (II Sam 4:2-9; 23:37; II Kg 10:15, 23; Jer 35:2-19).
The progenitor of this foreign line was a person named Rechab--whose lineage goes all the way back to a man named Hemath, a Kenite, mentioned earlier (I Chron 2:55). The name of this progenitor Hemath is elsewhere more correctly spelled as Hamath or Hammath (per Young’s “Analytical Concordance”). Thus, Hemath or Hamath seems to refer to the same individual.
This name of Hamath is very close in spelling and sound to the Hamathites, mentioned above as one of the tribes of Canaan. But Hamath was a Kenite, and if there is a tie to the Hamathites (Gen 10:18), it might be that there was some intermarriages between the Hamathites and the Kenites. Thus, maybe Hamath descended from one of these crosses.
The Kenites were one of the nations inhabiting the land at the time of Avraham (Gen 15:19). Interestingly, there is also evidence available (to be shortly outlined) to suggest that these very people probably are of the bloodline of Cain (the Hebrew Kayin) and his father, previously discussed (Matt 23:33; Jo 8:44; I Jo 3:12).
Based on Judges 1:16 and 4:11, some scholars have speculated that Jethro, Moshe’s father-in-law, was a Kenite. The better view is that Jethro was an Midianite (Ex 3:1), though there may have been some connections between him and the Kenites (like in his ancestry or descendants or in his geographical inhabitancy in the Sinai, part of which was in the territory of the Kenites, as well as Ethiopia and Egypt).
“Soncino Books of the Bible” (p. 161, Judges) notes that in Judges 1:16 the definite article is missing with the Keni which suggests that it was just one of the seven names of Jethro (the Kain tie to the Sinai was briefly cited in a prior chapter).
This mention of the Kenites and/or Rechabites in Canaan is furthermore significant because, after the Babylonian exile, some of these precise individuals returned with the Jews to Jerusalem during the time of Nechemyah (Neh 3:14). It appears that these Kenites were often identified as scribes over the years (I Chron 2:55; Neh 3:14).
A previous chapter noted the problems in the transmission of old writings in the days when scrolls were hand copied. Reference was made to some Hebrew scrolls found at Qumran which included a few texts in support of the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch and/or hybrid scrolls.
A question must persist on how these texts came into being. Without being dogmatic, it is likely that some non-Israelite scribes, like the just outlined Kenites, were employed in Second Temple days and made some mistakes or intentionally introduced some corruptions into the authorized Hebrew text. For Jeremiah 8:8, “The Soncino Books of the Bible” allow a link in saying that “the false pen of the scribes hath wrought falsely.”
The Kenites could be the exact people involved in Yirmeyahu’s words. Regardless of whether they did or did not alter some writings, one can perceive that they were evidently still around Jerusalem in YESHUA's day--especially in the context of their likely racial origins (Matt 23:33; Jo 8:44). Moreover, it is certain that they did not vanish into history, but are still present in modern Jewry in some form here in 2003.
The Kain Ties
Perchance, the single most persuasive proof of this just suggested link between the Kenites and Cain lies in the fact that, in the Hebrew (to be shortly established), both Cain and the Kenites evidently have been called "Kain" (Num 24:21-22; Jud 4:11).
Young's "Analytical Concordance" (p. 135, 562), in its commentary, recognizes this tie and opens the door to the likelihood that the Kenites must have been descendants of Ken or more likely Cain (Kain)--based on Numbers 24:22.
Other Hebrew lexicons and dictionaries seem to link the Kenites to Kain as well (i.e. Strong’s). This Kenite linkage to Kain is sufficient to make one suspect that the very word Kenite has a meaning of “belonging to Kain” or “sons of Kain,” as Dr Arnold Murray concluded years ago in an unpublished paper on “Kenite Genealogy.”
The Word sees fit to outline several famous prophecies of the old seer Balaam in Numbers 24. The KJV doesn’t render Number 24:22 correctly, but Jewish translations (like the one by Dr J. H. Hertz) give it as “Nevertheless Kain shall be wasted; How long? Asshur shall carry thee away captive” (“The Soncino Edition of the Pentateuch and the Haftorahs,” p. 680).
In commenting upon this text, Samson Raphael Hirsch notes the Kain connection to the Kenites (in Num 24:21) and goes on to tie this whole presentation to Judges 4:11 which focuses on the Kenites (“The Pentateuch,” v. 5, p. 424). The point is that the Kenites were descendants of Kain. That’s why the Torah lists them together in Numbers 24.
Before moving on, it would be useful to recognize that in the Scriptural outline of genealogies in Chronicles, the writer there saw fit to separate the lines of Caleb (mentioned earlier and to be elaborated upon later) and the Kenites in an interesting fashion from the Yehudim, following the exile (I Chron 2:18-55). Possibly, their racial ancestry may have prompted this presentation.
A Male Line of Descent
While space is too limited in this study to examine this Kenite-Kain connection in any detail, it should be noted that based upon how the Scriptures record and recognize genealogical lines (according to the male seed line), it is very plausible that the Kenites were descendants of Kain, via a male table of descent (as suggested above by Arnold Murray).
This remark on being the male seedline of Kain could be a surprise to readers since Christendom does not allow for a male thread back to Cain. At a first glance, one may suppose that the flood destroyed the male line of Kain. But alternatively, there could be at least two or more other situations, briefly suggested earlier, which would have preserved the Cain male line in a consistent fashion with the Word’s demands for truth.
Of course, much speculation has persisted that Kain left female lines. For example, Jewish tradition has it that Kain's female progeny, named Naamah (Gen 4:22), became the wife of Ham, the son of Noah. And it might be possible that the Kenites come from this line--via the Hamathites, as mentioned above. Nevertheless, a bloodline male descendant from Cain is revolutionary thinking.
Perhaps much of the difficulty in believing what the Word plainly says on this issue of Kain arises because the world has come to believe that "all" so-called human beings descend from Adam (including Cain, the chaiyah and the behemah) and that the flood was a universal one which destroyed all male lines, except for the one through Seth to Noah and Noah's three sons.
Naturally, these prevalent assumptions and presumptions emanating from the halls of Churchianity may or may not be correct at all, as indicated in previous chapters. The fact that Christians teach their traditions as truth is certainly no proof that their beliefs are truth. Everything has to be put to the test of the Word before it is conclusive.
After The Exile
Tragically, the reality of miscegenating and illegally mixing with the nokri/nekar aliens intensified when the Jewish returnees from Babylon married into the mongrel, nokri/nekar peoples of the land in such numbers and proportions that both Ezra and Nechemyah saw fit to write about this sin extensively, as has been broached previously herein (Ezra 9:1-15; 10:2-11; Neh 9:2; 10:30; 13:3, 23-29).
Also, of course, the line of Yehudah did assimilate many aliens and foreigners in the time of Esther, which must not be ignored (Est 8:17). It is patently obvious that many of these strangers becoming Jews in those days did so for fleshly non-religious purposes. For many of them, the Word is clear that they either became Jews or they were in serious trouble in the secular world (Est 8:13, 17).
The Racially Mixed Jews
The racial mixture of the Jewish people is not even argued in modern, reputable, Jewish writings.
For example, the “Universal Jewish Encyclopedia” (v. 10, p. 331) notes that “The Jews were probably derived from a Babylonian stock and must have been a mixture before they entered the land of Canaan. There was a further admixture of Canaanites, Arabs, Hittites, Philistines, Phoenicians, Greeks and innumerable other peoples.”
This same encyclopedia and same article goes on to dispute the existence of a Jewish race because of the admixtures and even when “excluding proselyte groups such as the Idumeans, Falashas, Yemenites, the Jews of China or the Khazars.”
The previously mentioned Dr Alfred M. Lilienthal adds that “The Jews have mingled most. Until the middle of the fifth century B. C. intermarriage was a normal phenomenon in Israelite life, and the ensuing Judaist proselytizing over the globe brought peoples of all races into the Jewish faith... The people who embraced Judaism (from Josephus’ time) were already mixed of many races and strains; and this diversification was rapidly growing” (“What Price Israel,” p. 216).
In broaching the word “Jew,” evidently in the racial or religious context, the “Jewish Almanac” of 1980 (p. 3, as quoted in the Aug 1998 “America’s Promise Newsletter,” p 7) correctly observed that “Strictly speaking it is incorrect to call an Ancient Israelite a ‘Jew’ or to call a contemporary Jew an Israelite or a Hebrew.”
The short of this thinking was well stated by Gordon Keith Pearce, in his book on “Israel Identity,” when he concluded that “the physical characteristics which we Europeans regard as typically Jewish were features mainly derived from admixture with the considerable Khazar-Tartar, Armenian, Hittite and North African communities which adopted the Jewish faith and amalgamated with the Jews during both dispersions.”
No Jewish Race!
Clearly, in modern times, there is no “Jewish race,” per se, because the so-called Jews are a mixture of many races and kinds. This reality is most interesting because huge numbers of both Christians and Jews suppose that there is a Jewish race.
Supposedly, the early Nazi political movement was predicated upon the existence of a “Jewish” race. Many Jews feel that this Nazi persecution was solely because of race.
This study takes the position that the Nazi opposition to the Jews was essentially over religion. Or otherwise, the Nazi authorities would have never legalized the Karaites (to be later described) and allowed them to exist, as evidently did happen. Historically, in Christian lands, any Jew willing to convert to Christendom was good. Christian hatred has always been primarily focused on the Jewish religion.
The original draft of the famous Balfour Declaration of November 2, 1917, from Arthur James Balfour (Britain’s Foreign Minister) to Baron Lionel Rothschild (on establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine), was prepared with a reference to “the Jewish race.”
But US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis (a noted Zionist of his day) prevailed to have the reference recast as “the Jewish people” (per Alfred Lilienthal, in his book “The Zionist Connection,” p. 15, 782).
Having just established that there is no Jewish race, per se, it is appropriate to recognize that there are at least two or more loose Jewish ethnic groups of sorts which are made up of the vast assortment of mixed races and peoples, as just outlined.
These Jewish ethnic groupings are further subdivided along various religious and political lines and definitions. They will be discussed in some detail in later chapters in this presentation.
Chapter 140--The Edomites
The Esau Line
One of the most extraordinary groups of people to constantly integrate and mix (actually attach themselves as parasites) with the peoples of Yisrael has been the Edomite descendants of Yakov Yisrael’s older brother Esau, meaning hairy (also known as Edom).
Since Edom means red, is it not plausible that Esau was red headed and possibly of red complexion or with red freckles? Clearly, he was born ruddy (Gen 25:25, “Soncino Chumash,” p. 141). Through centuries of miscegenation, this red coloring may have changed in many of his modern day descendants (because of darkening genes). But it could be a significant point of identification--at least, in the early years of his line.
In mentioning this linkage of Edom-red to Esau and his brood, some questions may arise on how this phenomenon may have occurred in view of the earlier discussion on the likely production of the red headed and red complexioned Irish in the chapter on evolution. Was there sufficient miscegenation in Yitzhak or Rebekah’s lineage to allow a strong red throwback in Esau? Well, it is clearly possible.
Among many believers, there is a strong supposition that both Yitzhak and Rebekah’s ancestry were pure Adamic, but that condition may not be totally true. Also, questions might be raised about Esau’s paternity. Was Yitzhak really his father? Or was someone else involved--like with Kain and as perhaps allowed in Genesis 25:23?
Finally, the Scriptural connection of Edom-red to the Esau line might be explained in the context that Esau miscegenated with certain non-Adamic peoples to produce the Edomite red (though the wording in Genesis 25:25 allows that he was described as being ruddy, as noted above). Regardless, maybe Edom-red is to be associated with some of Esau’s descendants and not necessarily with him, per se.
Esau's Struggle
The exceptional tendency and enormous push by the Edomites over a 3,900-year period with a view of gaining the land, promises and blessings made to Avraham and Yitzhak are indeed interesting. Time and space at this time will not allow a reasonable look at this subject, but a few remarks are called for (this subject will be further assessed in later chapters).
It is important to recognize that from the earliest of the beginnings of the twins Esau (also known as Edom) and Yakov (Jacob in the KJV), who was renamed Yisrael by YHWH, they struggled against each other during the pregnancy of their mother Rebekah (Gen 25:21-23). Of course, in time, the first born Esau foolishly sold his birthright to his younger brother over a bowl of worthless soup (Gen 25:33).
This stupidity and selfishness of the elder brother and the later cunning of Yakov (Gen 27:19-30) prompted Esau to develop a strong passionate hatred of his younger twin brother (Gen 27:41). The book of Jasher recognized this enmity (anger and hatred--Jasher 29:9-10) by the descendants of Esau toward their relatives, the Israelites, and pointed out its “age lasting” persistence (Jasher 58:28).
Even as late of the 6th century BCE, the prophet Yechezkel saw this continuing problem with the Edomites when he wrote of their perpetual hatred for the children of Yisrael (Ezek 35:5). Obviously, this conflict was no minor thing; and it was not about to end quickly--at least, in the eyes of Esau and his lineage.
Yakov’s sale of his soup to his brother Esau and Yakov’s later cunning and deception to take possession of Esau’s birthright and blessings has proven to be over history one of the most profoundly important events of all. It will be discussed in some detail in subsequent chapters which focus upon the struggle between these two brothers and their descendants over thousands of years.
Esau’s Sins
Of Esau's apparent shortcomings, perhaps one of his worse sins was his illegal interracial marriages (which were fornication--Heb 12:16) with the daughters of Canaan (Gen 28:6; 36:2), Heth/Hittites (Gen 26:34; 27:46; 36:2), Ishmael, (Gen 28:9; 36:3), Hivites (Gen 36:2) and evidently Horites by him and/or his descendants (Gen 36:19-43).
Certainly, he despised his own seed line (Gen 26:34-35), as well as his birthright (Gen 25:34), which goes to suggest another tragic feature of his personality. In a commentary on Malachi 1:1-3, where YHWH indicates His hatred for Esau (per the KJV), the Jul-Sep 2001 “Hebrew Roots” (p. 4) asks about the why for this hatred?
The answer may be that Esau displayed his personal selfishness toward his own children and descendants when he sold his birthright for a bowl of soup. Effectively, he could have cared less about his own children and their future. He was interested only in himself and his immediate self-gratification. Like the Torah says-- he despised his own seed-line.
Thus, there was over time several good reasons why Yisrael should have exercised some care and discretion to maintain a degree of separation or segregation from the Edomites (a state of "kodesh" --per the Hebrew). Yet, the two peoples continued to find themselves physically thrust together--perhaps as perpetuated by Esau in his evil efforts to recover the lost birthright.
A Continuing Problem
Iyov mentioned that one of his friends was a man named Eliphaz, a Temanite (Job 2:11); and thus, a progeny of Esau (evidently Esau’s son Eliphaz). By the time of the establishment of the unified kingdom under Shaul, there was a reference to the Edomite Doeg in the context of Yisrael (I Sam 21:7; 22:8-10, 18). Certainly, Doeg was a very treacherous and evil man.
From the earliest days of the nation of Yisrael, just after the Exodus, the Book reflects the probable isolated presence of some Kenezite descendants of Kenaz, like the previously mentioned Caleb and Othniel, with the tribe of Yehudah (Josh 14:6; Jud 3:9). There are possibly two different groups of Kenizzite/Kenezite peoples who could be the relatives of Caleb and Othniel.
This writer has looked carefully at this connection and has been unable to decide which Kenaz that these two famous brothers were related to. In the first instance, there were some Kenizzite peoples who inhabited Canaan when Avraham first came there (Gen 15:19). These people will be elaborated upon in later remarks herein.
Otherwise, there was a subsequent Kenaz who was a son of Eliphaz, mentioned above, and grandson of Esau (Gen 36:11-15). It’s hard to say whether Caleb and Othniel were from Esau or the earlier Kenizzite peoples.
At the moment, the best option would seem to be for them to link to Esau because of the KJV spelling of Kenezite, although other translations spell the two names the same. “The Soncino Books of the Bible” (v. 2, p. 82) has it that Caleb and Othniel were descendants of Kenaz the Edomite.
In either case, their non-Israelite origin might have something to do with the separate presentation of Caleb’s genealogy in Chronicles (I Chron 2:18-54). Otherwise, one would have to wonder why The ELOHIM chose to outline Caleb’s personal genealogy, as He did in His Word with its very limited presentation on the histories of non-Israelite peoples.
Though these two brothers (Caleb and Othniel) were mentioned in the Scriptures as Kenezites, it is reasonable to believe that their particular line had crossed back with Israelites for several generations and may not have involved much of the adverse genes of Esau or whoever, as stipulated in the 3/10 generation exclusion rule, outlined earlier in this publication.
The Amalekite Haman
In later times, one of the more famous adversaries of truth was the well known Haman (who was mentioned in the Prologue), the son of Hammedatha and an Agagite. He was at the pinnacle of power in the cabinet of King Ahasuerus of the Medes and Persians and in direct opposition to Mordicai and Esther (Est 3:1-5). He wanted to destroy all the true Jewish Israelites in his day.
As scholar Herbert Lockyer observes, the Agagite Haman was thus a descendant of the Amalekites from Esau (“All the Men of the Bible,” p. 155). “Young’s Analytical Concordance” (p. 31) suggests that the Amalekites descended from Amalek, a grandson of Esau (Gen 36:10-16; I Chron 1:36). In time, the Amalekites became one of the most formidable and worse enemies of all for Yisrael, as will shortly be shown.
The Amalekites have been mentioned in preceding comments and will be described in some detail in succeeding chapters. But there is one important reality that the student of truth must remember in assessing the Amalekites (as well as the other tribes and segments of the Esau clan). All Amalekites are Edomites, but all Edomites are not necessarily Amalekites.
Likewise, all of the Phoenicians seemed to be Edomites (as will be shortly described below), but all Edomites were not Phoenicians.
The point of this is that any reference to the Amalekites herein is a reference to some Edomites, but not necessarily all Edomites since the Edomite definition is something bigger than just the Amalekites. A reference to the Edomites may be to the broader definition or any part or parcel of the clan.
3,900 Years of Evil
Therefore, it is sufficient to say that from the time of Esau's loss of the birthright on (Gen 25:33: 27:36, 41), from c1900 BCE to the early 21st century CE, his seed line has worked long, hard, diligently and patiently to try to recover the lost birthright, blessings and promises.
The Edomites have typically labored in a clandestine, secret fashion to try to recover the lost birthright, blessings and promises
But sometimes, they have worked more overtly and clearly as they did in the form of the Edomite Ottoman Turks--who conquered, controlled and ruled Palestine for centuries before they were finally crushed and expelled by the British and an Arab (Ishmaelite) army led by the famous Lawrence of Arabia in WWI.
This situation with the Edomite Turks and the Ishmaelite Arabs is most interesting. It demonstrates the incredible reality that once Yisrael entered the promise land and took possession of it from the Canaanites (following the Exodus), much of that land has usually been in the possession of either Israelites or other descendants of Avraham.
Earlier Scriptural evidence was presented suggesting that even many or all of the occupying Romans were actually Israelites.
If this land occupation phenomenon is true and holds for thousands of years, one must pause and take note of the British control of Palestine from December 1917 (with the General Allenby conquest) up to 1948 when the Jews took over. Would the British occupation (mandate) be an exception to this strange correlation?
The Phoenicians, Revisited
And in fact, overt Esau efforts to control the land could well go back substantially further in time than the Ottomans all the way back to the Phoenicians of ancient OT days; who, various historians say, were, in reality, Edomites, as noted above (per Josephus, "Antiquities of the Jews," book xiii, chapter 9, verse 1 and other writings).
If so, then the obvious Esau presence and influence in the land has been quite profound--spanning thousands of years.
While there is no intent to get off on a tangent at this stage, it should be pointed out that some scholars have suggested that numbers of Phoenicians migrated West to Ireland and possibly some elsewhere in Britain and settled there at an early time (May-Jun 1998 “America’s Promise Newsletter,” p. 6).
The February 1999 “Kingdom Digest” magazine had an article by J. S. Brooks on “The Hebrew-Celtic Connection” (p. 15-17) which described the Phoenician immigration to Ireland.
As evidence of the extensive Phoenician link to the early Irish peoples, Brooks quotes a number of 18th century linguists who have reported the similarities between the Punic (Phoenician) language and the early Irish Celtic language. Likely, the incoming Phoenicians amalgamated and mixed with peoples already there and/or other incoming immigrants to form the early Irish people, language and culture.
This Phoenician presence probably accounts for the Catholic culture and religious beliefs and the dominant red heads and red complexions of many of the modern Irish. While the Southern Irish are thought to be Celts, it must be pointed out that they are of the Gaelic branch, as opposed to other branches in other parts of Great Britain (Funk & Wagnalls’ “Standard Desk Dictionary,” p. 101).
Two Celts
In this context, it appears that there are probably two identifiable groups of Celts. An article by Valerie Martlew on the “Lost Celts” in the Oct 1998 “New Beginnings” (p. 11-12) recognizes this duality. She says that there are two main strains of Celts--those called “Celtiberians” and the later Celts, who were often known as “Cimmeroi, Sakae, Scythians, etc.”
The Celtiberians colonized the shores of the Mediterranean at an early date (c1800 BCE) and established settlements in Spain, Portugal and even Great Britain (as just cited). The writer of this present study would suggest that these early Celts probably were the Phoenician descendants of Esau. Likely, they are still found in today’s Southern Ireland, as noted above.
However, the later Celts, particularly the Cimmeroi (Cimmerian), were perhaps not of Phoenician stock, but were largely of Israelite heritage. Their linkage to the early Edomite Phoenician Celts probably arises because of their close proximity in Canaan and later parallel or like emigrations from the Middle East to the West.
The subsequent miscegenation and amalgamation, particularly by the Northern tribe of Dan with the Phoenicians (evidently in later Ireland), made the two peoples somewhat inseparable in Southern Ireland in the context of the Gaelic Celtic branch (probably with the Phoenician blood predominating).
Early Phoenician Power over Yisrael
But returning to the early Phoenician power over Yisrael in her kingdom days, it might be argued that it was generally limited. The fact remains though that it did succeed for a time and were it not for the intervention of The ELOHIM, it could have persisted.
The best illustration of this phenomenon surfaced when the House of Yisrael's King Achav foolishly married the Phoenician woman Jezebel. Jezebel’s father Ethbaal was the king of Zidon or Sidon (I Kg 16:31) which was a part of Phoenicia (“Davis Dictionary of the Bible,” p. 761-762).
Please note that the Phoenician area of Western Canaan included the areas of Tyre (the great commercial center) and Sidon. In this context, can one draw a parallel between this historical fact and the later, age ending, commercial empire established by Edomite descendants of Esau? Future chapters on the super rich and the New World Order allow for this correlation.
It goes without saying (or having to prove) that Jezebel was one of the most evil and diabolical women of not only Yisrael--but indeed, perhaps of all nations of all time. She was extremely nasty and through her influence, much of the wicked Baal religion and thinking of the Phoenicians were introduced and expanded into the House of Yisrael.
In Yehudah As Well
Not only was this ostensible Edomite thinking dominant for a time in the Northern tribes, but it gained a foothold in the Southern House of Yehudah as well when Jezebel's daughter Athaliah (Atalyahu in the Hebrew) married Jehoram (Yehoram in the Hebrew), the future king of Yehudah (II Kg 8:18). Yehoram only ruled eight years before dying. But for those eight years, he was of the same bent and disposition as Jezebel (II Kg 8:18).
With the demise of Yehoram, his son Ahaziah (Achazyah in the Hebrew), from Atalyahu, became king (II Kg 8:24). Achazyah governed Yehudah for about one year before being killed. He, likewise, followed suit in the same depraved path of his father Yehoram, his mother Atalyahu and his grandmother Jezebel (II Kg 8:26-27).
By a strange set of circumstances, the evil Atalyahu seized the House of Yehudah throne with the death of her son Achazyah (II Kg 11:3). She actually reigned over Yehudah for some six or seven years (II Kg 11:3-4) and tried her best to murder all of the members of the Judean royal family from David (II Kg 11:1). Nevertheless, the later to be king, Joash (Yoash in the Hebrew), then an infant child, survived (II Kg 11:2).
Significantly, this Jezebel family control over both Yisrael and Yehudah was curtailed by YHWH when He pronounced a curse on the line of Achav (II Kg 9:8) and raised up a new king in Yisrael named Jehu (Yehu in the Hebrew) to carry out a death sentence on all of Achav's male descendants in Samaria (II Kg 9:6; 10:1-11). Yehu also slew Yehudah's King Achazyah (II Kg 9:27).
Thus, the temporary Phoenician dominion over Yisrael and Yehudah was largely broken. But tragically, the evil had already been done, mainly in the Northern Yisrael kingdom, with the outright promotion of Baal sun worship among the gullible Israelites (which has persisted to modern times with a subtle presence in Christendom).
It is also important to note that during the reign of Yehudah’s King Ahaz, the Edomites attacked Yehudah and carried away Israelite captives (II Chron 28:17). This assault seems to have included a land conquest, as the context notes (II Chron 28:13-19). At this time, the king of Syria recovered Elath and some of the Edomites returned there (II Kg 16:6, per the Masoretic text in the “Soncino Books of the Bible”).
Beyond these clear, open and almost undisputed Esau efforts to seize the land and promises outright, the Edomites have more often concentrated on sly, crafty, clever, discreet and covert methods of seizure, as they did in Second Temple days through the efforts of King Herod the Great and his family and associates (as cited in the Prologue). This reality will now be conclusively established.
Josephus
The Jewish scholar Josephus, in his writings on the "Antiquities of the Jews," tells about the powerful and extensive presence of Edomites (Idumeans in Greek) in Palestine after the Babylonian exile and long after the Phoenicians ceased to be a power in the Middle East.
Josephus' best known remarks about the existence and power structure of Idumeans, posing as Jews within the Palestinian Jewish community, concerns the evil and wicked King Herod (The Great) and his family who were undeniably racial Edomites (“Antiquities of the Jews,” book xiv, chapter 1, verse 3).
The reality of this distinction (or mixing) prompted Josephus to later call Herod a "half Jew" (“Antiquities of the Jews,” book xiv, chapter 15, verse 2). Antigonus, Herod’s enemy (“Antiquities of the Jews,” chapter 9, verse 1 footnote), did the same thing.
Since Herod’s father and mother were reportedly both racial Edomites (“Davis Dictionary of the Bible,” p. 315), it is unclear what a half Jew meant.
What is a Half Jew
Stephen E. Jones, in the “Foundation for Intercession” newsletter (issue #156, Jan 2002, p. 1), suggests that the half-Jew designation arose because Herod was actually half Idumean and half Judean--in that Herod’s father Antipater was “captured by Idumeans while he was still young and had been raised in Idumea.” Jones then adds that this Antipater married Herod’s mother, “an Idumean girl.”
The implication of Jones’ words are that Antipater, Herod’s father, was a Jew who was captured and raised by the Idumeans. However, this allegation does not jive with the historical information which this writer can ascertain from various dictionary sources available to me.
For example, the “Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period” (p. 42) says that Antipater, Herod’s father, was an Idumean by birth. The “Oxford Companion to the Bible” (p. 281) indicates that Herod’s father Antipater was a son of an earlier Antipater who was made Governor of Idumea by the Hasmoneans.
The source of this Antipater I is unclear; but surely, he was a genuine Edomite to justify his governorship (if he was not an Idumean, would the Hasmoneans have appointed him to be governor?). Anyway, the point is that there is some uncertainty about the real meaning of the phrase “half Jew.”
Perhaps the best explanation is that one of the parents of Herod the Great (Antipater II or his Idumean wife) was an alleged convert to Judaism (which suggests a religious twist to the term half Jew). In any case, this exact situation involving the Idumeans could tie back in some way to the bramble bush, as will be discussed in a later chapter.
Many Edomites Forcibly Converted to Judaism
But the Herod family was only the tip of the Esau iceberg. Because elsewhere, Josephus is careful to mention that all of the Edomite peoples, living in two whole Idumea towns, were circumcised and became Jews during the time of John Hyrcanus, c134-104 BCE (“Antiquities of the Jews,” book XIII, chapter 9, verse 1).
Evidently, this Edomite conversion involved thousands of individuals. Actually, per Josephus, John Hyrcanus' conquest of Idumea provided the impetus for the forced conversion of most, if not all, of its inhabitants to Judaism ("Antiquities of the Jews," book XIII, chapter 7, verse 9 and chapter 9, verse 1).
"Encyclopaedia Judaica" (per 1971 edition, volume 6, page 378) interprets this event by saying that "Thenceforth, the Edomites became a section of the Jewish people" and that this proselytization was the first of its kind in that it was one of an entire race of people (ibid, v. 8, p. 632).
It must be noted here that this conversion was contrary to YHWH’s laws which precluded Edomites from becoming members of the congregation or assembly of Yisrael until the third generation, as elaborated upon in a previous chapter (Ex 12:45; Deut 23:7-8).
The point is that Hyrcanus and his colleagues were more interested in gaining converts than they were in obeying The ELOHIM’s Torah.
Edomites Assumed Power Over Both Yehudah and Yisrael
“Encyclopaedia Judaica” (v. 8, p. 632) also went on to relate that the Edomites became an inseparable part of the Jewish nation and that their upper classes began to occupy important positions in the government and society of the Hasmonean kingdom.
With this conversion, the Edomites were to thereafter attain and maintain a leadership and dominating role over the House of Yehudah. This is an important fact to keep in mind when assessing the character of the supposed Jewish leadership in Jerusalem in YESHUA’s day--as will be done in a later chapter.
In recognizing this Edomite assumption of a leadership role over the House of Yehudah, it should be observed that the nokri/nekar Edomites could not legally exercise rule over Israelites, as discussed previously (Ex 21:7-8; Deut 17:15; Joel 2:17).
Moreover, just as it was illegal to allow the Edomites in positions of rule over Israelites, their conversion to Judaism and membership in the Congregation were so blatantly wrong that one has to wonder how in the world that Jewish religious authorities could have silently sat back and allowed it to have happened. Somehow, Jewish leaders have never understood YHWH’s plain laws on the Edomites.
People quick to criticize and condemn the Israelite Jews, over allowing the conversion of Edomites to Judaism, and the elevation of nokri/nekar Edomites into leadership roles over Yehudah, need to back off. The Christian House of Yisrael nations have been doing the exact same thing for ages now, as will be described in later comments.
Interestingly, the House of Yisrael nations have not only willingly allowed the most vile and diabolically evil Edomites of all into leadership roles over their nations, but the Christian Churches have always welcomed those willing to convert with outreached arms. In this regard, Christian theology is as bad or worse than Jewish thinking.
Here, two more remarks are needed. Later commentary herein will define these evil Edomites, ruling over both Yehudah and Yisrael, as actually being Amalekites. In terms of the Amalekites, Christian Identity leader James Bruggeman teaches that David’s two wives kidnapped by the Amalekites (I Sam 30:1-5) were prophetic of Yehudah and Yisrael. This connection could well be true.
While Judaica’s conclusions, outlined above, are important to consider, the point must be made that this massive Edomite conversion to Judaism in Palestine only involved a portion of the larger definition of Edom.
The actual historic Edomite family and dispersion consisted of a number of groups of other Edomite people, to be shortly described. In other words, the person searching for the Edomites in history must look in several directions beyond just the Jews.
Edomite Integration
To appreciate where these Edomites came from in Palestine in the first century CE, it would be well to turn to "Asimov's Guide to the Bible," where the popular science writer mentions the vacuum of people that occurred in the land of Judah when the remnant of the House of Yehudah was deported to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar, c554 BCE.
Dr Asimov says that the Edomites moved Northward into Southern Judah from their desert homelands in the South to fill up much of that vacuum. The Scriptures allude to this Edomite land acquisition as well (Ezek 25:12; 35:2-10; Oba 1:10-16). Actually, from the perspective of true Jews, this Edomite land seizure of Yehudah was correctly a theft, as the Apocrypha conclusively proves.
On this land theft, it is interesting that one of the actions of the later Persian King Darius was his order that the Edomites were to surrender certain villages (and evidently some of the involved land) that they had stolen from Yehudah earlier (I Esdras 4:45-51; Enoch 89:66). Despite this limited land return, the evidence is that much of the stolen land area remained under Edomite control from the Jewish exile forward.
Wherefore, by the time of the Jewish return to Palestine, Southern portions of the old land area of Yehudah (which later converted to Judaism in John Hyrcanus’ days) were then inhabited by Edomites and came to be known as Idumea. It is also quite manifest that this Edomite presence extended far North, perhaps even to Jerusalem/Samaria.
The Edomites and Samaritans
The Ethiopian book of Enoch (v. 72) allows that it was the Edomites who interfered in the rebuilding of the Second Temple in the days of Yeshua, Zerubbabel and Ezra, as discussed in an earlier chapter. While it’s possible that the Edomites were directly involved in this oppression with the Samaritans against Yehudah, there could be another explanation.
It’s possible that some of the Edomites integrated and amalgamated in the Jerusalem and/or Samaritan areas with the Cuthean-Samaritans before/during the Jewish exile and were sometimes referred to as Samaritans after the Jewish return (in the sense of a geographical definition). If so, this explanation would account for the great evil and treachery which the Samaritans exhibited against the returning Jewish Israelites.
Clearly, some Jews did mix with the Samaritans after the exile. For example, Dr Randall Price (“The Coming Last Days Temple,” p. 336) tells the story of one priest named Menachem, who married Nikaso, daughter of the Samaritan king Sanballat (who was the Samaritan king opposing Nechemyah in his work on rebuilding Jerusalem--Neh 2:10; 4:1-7; 6:1-14).
As noted in a prior remark on this priest, Nechemyah chased him away from the restored Jewish priesthood (Neh 13:28). According to Price, the story is that Menachem went to Samaria where his father-in-law built a Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim and made him high priest of it. This became the sacred site of the Samaritans for their warped religion.
Also, one must recall a suggestion from Josephus that some apostate Jews moved to the Samaria province to live (as discussed in a former chapter). Is it possible that some of the Amalek-Edomites, posing as Jews or Jewish converts, moved to the geographical land area of Samaria to live?
Geography?
These options gain some credibility from the Dead Sea Scrolls. One document mentions the great Jewish hatred for the Samaritans and the reality of their great evil and wickedness (“The Dead Sea Scrolls, A New Translation,” p. 333-334). This outline of Jewish feelings and beliefs closely parallels Jewish motivations for the Edomites and particularly the Amalekites, to be described in later comments.
In these remarks, please remember that the Assyrians settled the Cutheans and other Cushites in the Samaritan geographical area after the conquest of the House of Yisrael (as was noted previously). Much early literature refers to these people as Cutheans.
Conversely, the word Samaritans was a term for residents of this geographical province. After the Jewish exile, the people living in this area were called Samaritans--which could refer to anyone living in the area and not necessarily to Cutheans.
Edomite Assimilation With Yehudah
Clearly, there was a significant Edomite presence in Jerusalem by the time of the Herods. This point cannot be disputed. Of course, Jewish racial integration and amalgamation with these Idumeans soon commenced and proceeded on in the Judea area, until the eventual fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in 70 CE.
Significantly, a Reader's Digest book on "Jesus And His Times" maintains that all of the Edomites living in Idumea eventually became Jews by the time of the birth of The MESSIAH. While the totality of the Idumeans in Palestine may not have converted to Judaism, howbeit, many certainly did.
With such an enormous Esau link to the Jews, it perchance did follow that in some respects the two peoples living in Judea and Northern Edom appeared to be essentially one. On this, Josephus told of at least a single instance when the Idumeans observed and celebrated Pentecost with the Jews (“Antiquities of the Jews,” book xvii, chapter 10, verse 2).
Also, the New Testament noted that some persons from Idumea came with the Jews to see YESHUA in the first century (Mk 3:8). From the earlier presentation, in this chapter on the Edomites of Southern Canaan, a point of clarification is now needed.
While much of the Northern part of Edom converted to Judaism in Second Temple days, the fact remains that Esau had a host of descendants--many of whom eventually became separate peoples and nations and never stayed in that section of Palestine to become Jews in Second Temple days--like the Phoenicians (to include part of the mixed blooded Irish), the Ottoman Turks, other non-Arab Muslims and still one more important group, to be described in the following chapter.
Chapter 141--The Khazars
More Edomites
Of extreme relevance for the true Jews and indeed for planet earth, at large, the Edomite presence and power grip didn't end with the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans in 70 CE.
Because, in more modern times, there is another group of persons known as Jews who have used their political and money powers to not only control the collective Jews and the modern Israeli state, but also much of the so-called Western world. These alleged Jews are the Khazars who evidently come genetically from Esau (as will now be established below)
The Khazars
Recorded world history tells about a most fascinating ethnic grouping of people known to historians as the Mongol-Turkic Khazars.
They are called Jews and thought to be Jews by many persons in the world in our age; but in reality, they are not of Yehudah at all (per "The Thirteenth Tribe" by Arthur Koestler, “Encyclopedia Britannica,” “Universal Jewish Encyclopedia” and “Encyclopaedia Judaica,” v. 10, p. 944-953).
Consequently, they collectively constitute one of the greatest hoaxes to be accepted and believed by a vast number of people in world history. These Khazars descend racially from a seed line that reportedly converted, en masse, to Judaism in Western Asia and Eastern Europe around 740 CE or so (per Arthur Koestler and “Encyclopaedia Judaica”).
While the bulk of them today are not of Yehudah, there could potentially be a few who do descend from some of the early “rabbis” eventually brought in from Oriental and Sephardim communities (with roots from First and Second Temple peoples) to teach Judaism to the Khazars, sometime after their conversion. Thus, some of the “rabbis” with the Khazars, over the years, could be of legitimate Israelite stock.
The previously quoted Dr Alfred M. Lilienthal said that the Khazars are the lineal ancestors of Eastern European Jewry is an historical fact. Jewish historians and religious text-books acknowledge the fact, though the propagandists of Jewish nationalism belittle it as pro-Arab propaganda (“What Price Israel,” p. 222).
Lilienthal also relates that the modern Ashkenazi Jews come essentially from this stem of Eastern European Khazars (who historically used the mixed Yiddish language with Hebrew characters).
In the “Concise Dictionary of Judaism” (p. 23), Dagobert D. Runes ties the Khazar description to the Jews of Northern and Eastern Europe, but then goes on to state that their origin is unclear, while citing Gen 10:3 and Jer 51:27.
Khazar Ties to Japheth
Genesis 10:3 and I Chronicles 1:6 do indicate that Noah’s son Japheth had a grandson named Ashkenaz by his son Gomer.
The Khazar tie to Ashkenazi Jews has prompted some scholars to speculate that the Khazars descend from Ashkenaz, Gomer and Japheth. Even Dagobert D. Runes, just cited, subtly allowed for this connection. But this writer disputes that conclusion.
Otherwise, some of the historic Khazars themselves have argued that they descend from Togarma, another grandson of Japheth and brother of Ashkenaz (Gen 10:3), apparently as other Turkish peoples are alleged to descend from Togarma (“The Thirteenth Tribe,” p. 72). Again, this writer would differ from this historic position.
It might be historically and genealogically true that as the Khazars wandered North through Asia Minor and into the Western Asia and Eastern Europe regions that they did miscegenate and intermarry with some of the Ashkenaz and Togarma peoples from Japheth. This would be a very plausible scenario and particularly so if these Ashkenaz or Togarma peoples inhabited the same area where the Khazars settled.
A later chapter will establish that these Khazars historically have been known to be nomads and wanderers.
Arthur Koestler notes that Soviet archaeologists found that their early houses were built in a circular shape and the foundations were sunk into the ground (“The Thirteenth Tribe,” p. 18).
Koestler (p. 18) makes the case that these dwellings symbolized the transition from portable, dome-shaped tents to permanent dwellings and from the nomadic state to a settled or semi-settled existence. He also suggests that in their early history in the Caucasus, they were under tutelage of the old Hun empire and later under Turkish power (ibid, p. 24).
More Khazar Realities
In any case, it has been primarily this line of Eastern-European Ashkenazi Khazars, who have become so dominant in American (New York, Washington and Hollywood) and European affairs.
Even the modern Jewish state of Israel has been somewhat under the political control of these same individuals (to be described in later chapters).
Incredibly so, some modern, so-called “Bible scholars," ignorant of the history of the Khazars, actually believe that these Khazars out of Eastern Europe and Russia, in particular, are of the lost House of Yisrael (as noted earlier).
As a matter of information, the Khazars appear to be mostly (but not necessarily in total) racial and ethnic Edomites (as are most Turks generally), in the main, with doses of Kenite (previously discussed) and Mongoloid genes and perhaps even some presence of other racial types (like Japheth and the behemah) with no evident link to the real racial Jews of Palestine at all.
Khazar Tie To Seir
Here, it is interesting to note that knowledge of the Khazar genealogical linkage to Esau has persisted to our time primarily because of their own handed down traditions, as documented in some early diplomatic correspondence (a letter) involving King Joseph of the Khazars (per "The Jewish Encyclopedia," 1905 edition, volume IV, page 3).
This letter, under discussion, was written in 960 CE and referred to the tradition that the Khazars once dwelt near the Seir Mountains which were the ancestral home of the Edomites (Gen 32:3; 36:8-9, 21; Deut 2:5; Josh 24:4; Isa 34:6). Evidently, they descend, in part, from Esau and at least one of his Canaanite wives (Jasher 29:20-23).
Having formerly cited the Edomite color red and the modern Irish, it should be noted that an early Arab chronicler said that the Khazars’ hair was predominately reddish, while a later Arab writer said that they were black headed with some being very swarthy and dark and others being white in color (“The Thirteenth Tribe,” p. 19-20).
This Khazar hair color change could be attributed to years of miscegenation with the darker races.
Yair Davidy Revisited
Yair Davidy makes the case that the Khazars were of three types--dark haired and dark complexioned, like the Hindus; dark haired and light pale-skinned; and red haired, blue-eyed, large limbed, wild countenanced, and heavy moving ( “Lost Israelite Identity,” p. 270). Again, the dark hair and coloring could have occurred over the years from miscegenation with dark peoples.
Davidy also tries to build a case for the Khazars to be Israelites. He specifically tries to identify some people called “Agathyrsi” with both the Khazars and the previously mentioned Picts that migrated eventually into Britain (“Lost Israelite Identity,” p. 275-277). Davidy believes that both peoples were of the lost tribes of Israel which inhabited Scythia for a time.
“Encyclopaedia Judaica” (v. 10, p. 944) makes an interesting point on the Khazars which might be relevant to the Agathyrsi, as mentioned by Davidy. Judaica notes that in the empire of the Huns in the fifth century CE, the Khazars were known as “Akatzirs,” as derived from Aq-Khazar--the White Khazars, in contrast to the Qara-Khazar, the Black Khazars.
All of this is interesting in view of the Hebrew word “khazir,” meaning swine, broached earlier, and to be assessed in some detail in a later chapter herein.
More on the Picts
While part of lost Yisrael probably inhabited Scythia and were known as Scythians, there seems to be no viable reason to link the Scythians to the Khazars or Picts. Likely, the Picts were Hamitic peoples (Canaanites?) or Edomites out of the Middle East who may have lived in Scythia, the Caucasus and any number of other areas before eventually reaching Britain.
If the Picts were the Agathyrsi and if they connect in some manner to the Khazars, it is highly plausible that they, like the Khazars, descend in some manner from Esau. If they are Edomites, their darker colorings would suggest that their line had miscegenated greatly with Colored peoples in the Middle East or in Asia before reaching Britain (a common Edomite trait).
The previously quoted Valerie Martlew makes the case that the Picts were early Celtiberians (“Lost Celts,” in the Oct 1998 “New Beginnings,” p. 10). If they were Celtiberians, they were clearly Phoenicians who had miscegenated with darker Hamitic peoples. In any case, it is plausible that the Picts link in some way to Esau.
Certainly, this is true for the Khazars. For reasons to be discussed later, the best estimate would be that the Khazars descend from Amalek, son of Eliphaz (and his concubine Timna, who was a Horite--Gen 36:12, 22), son of Esau and his Hittite wife Adah (Gen 36:1-16; I Chron 1:36), who lived in the early Seir area. More evidence of this linkage will be outlined in succeeding chapters.
The Hittite Noses
Perhaps this is a good place to recognize the relevance of the very distinctive, big, hooked or curved noses of a sizable number of Eastern European Khazars. This distinctive nose is so commonplace among the Khazars that it has come to illustrate their principle characteristic.
Charles A Weisman, in his book “The Origin of Race and Civilization,” connects this unique, big nose back (by archeological evidence) to the Hittite peoples of the Middle East (part of the Canaanite nation, discussed earlier).
Significantly, Esau seems to have married perhaps two or three Hittite women--including the just mentioned Adah (Gen 26:34; 36:2).
The “Universal Jewish Encyclopedia” (v. 9, p. 60) goes on to say that “The Hittites represent in antiquity the Armenian type, and as a result of the intermixture with the Jews...introduced into the Jewish people that element which in Europe, especially in caricatures, is generally regarded as being specifically Jewish (small stature, smooth skull, arched quiline nose, slight obliquences and slit-like form of the eyes, tendency toward obesity, small, slightly arched limbs).”
Other Peoples As Well
Incidentally, before leaving this issue, it would be well to note that this same, unusual, big, figure 6, hawk nose is also occasionally seen among modern Italians, Greeks, Turks and several other Southern European and Middle Eastern peoples. It is not linked solely to the Khazars.
Even some persons in France, the British Isles and other supposedly Caucasian nations have the same Hittite noses, as well. Certainly, these noses have nothing to do with the true Yehudim or Israelites at all--though some Hittites were connected to Yehudah from very early times.
In our contemporary society, a number of diverse, famous individuals have presented some evidence of this distinctive nose, such as Charles DeGaulle, Ross Perot, Michael Dukakis, George Washington, Henry Kissinger, Guy Lombardo, Jimmy Durante, Barbara Walters, Victor Mature, Marlon Brando, Gabriel Byrne, Dustin Hoffman, Al Pacino, Bruce Willis, Tom Cruise, etc.
Without a doubt, Tony Bennett, Barbra Streisand and Ron Silver all have classic Hittite noses. In mentioning this extensive presence of Hittite noses throughout various nations, it becomes manifest that the Hittite noses are not the exclusive property of Edomites.
The Cossacks
The mention of these early Khazars brings up another point outlined in an article on the “Cossacks: ‘Back in the Saddle Again,’” in the Aug 1998 “Prophetic Observer” (p. 1-4) which tried to connect the Cossacks to the Khazars. However, the Cossacks were Christians who were not only anti-Communists, but persons who had joined in with the Germans in WWII.
It’s hard to fathom that the Cossacks could be racially from the Khazars. But if so, it goes to establish that there was a spilt among the historic Khazars with some of them becoming Christians (Russian Orthodox) while the rest turned to Judaism.