|
Author
|
Topic: GENESIS 22:17 / NOT A PROMISE GIVEN TO THE JEWS
|
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days) Posts: 989 From: Leicester, UK Joined: 07-30-2004
|
Once more with feeling
For the THIRD time of asking - what makes your lineage chart 'official' ? I've put this question in a reply by itself so it doesn't get lost in the chatter. Please have the simple courtesy to give a straightforward answer to a straightforward question. Now to reply to your post proper...
|
Amlodhi
Inactive Member
|
Re: Royal House of Britain
quote:
WT: Thus ASSERTS this Doudna character.
Yes. Greg Doudna is not a source. He is someone who is interpreting a source; just like Dr. Scott. However, as I said, after reading through much of the annals and epic poetry of Ireland (the source material) myself, I am inclined to agree with Doudna's assessment. What is conspicuous from your post is that, once again, you are unable to provide any references or text quotations from the actual source material to support your position. Such consistent failure on your part is sufficiently revealing. Quod erat demonstrandum. Amlodhi
|
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days) Posts: 989 From: Leicester, UK Joined: 07-30-2004
|
Re: Royal House of Britain
WILLOWTREE writes: IOW, because the official website of the monarchy does not proclaim their lineage - this omission means their lineage is whatever you believed it to be.
Errr - no. I simply observed that if your claim is true then I would have expected it to be stated and probably substantiated on the official website. What is unreasonable about this view ? To be honest, prior to seeing your claim I hadn't really even thought much about the lineage of the Windsors beyond what I was taught in history in school. In fact, prior to discovering these forums I was only vaguely aware of this Hebrews in Britain stuff - to the extent that I was expecting the lineage chart to be based on the throne of England rather than the bloodline of QE II. This was because you mentioned that everyone who had occupied the throne was descended from David. We English regularly make the mistake of equating "British" with "English" (apologies to Brian if he's following this !), so I was originally thinking in terms of the Stuarts, Tudors, Plantagenets etc. Obviously this was my mistake, but I'm just trying to show that I don't have the preconceived views you seem to be ascribing to me.
WILLOWTREE writes: All my evidence is posted with source cite.
All except where the 'official' chart comes from 
WILLOWTREE writes: If you go to Dr. Scott's website he reads from BOOKS - many many books which substantiate the claims from every conceivable angle and era. IOW, just because you are genuinely ignorant it is not so.
I'm afraid I don't understand what you are trying to say - what is not so ?
WILLOWTREE writes: It is not a matter of opinion - the British Crown descends from David. Prince Charles knows this very well...
You can of course substantiate this assertion ? Have you discussed this with Prince Charles, or at least somebody in or connected to the Royal Family - if not then can you give a reference to an interview or book etc. where such a person states this ?
|
jar
Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Royal House of Britain
WILLOWTREE writes: The point is Jeremiah had special protection and amongst his entourage was this suviving daughter of the Davidic lineage - Tia Tephi. Therefore, unbeknownst to Nebuchadnezzar, the Davidic line was alive and well being protected by the captain of his guard. Can you support this assertion? I have checked about twelve different versions of the Bible and Apocrypha and can find no mention of Tia Tephi or any variation of possible spellings. Others have said that the connection as you assert does not appear in the annals. So if this is not from the Bible, and not from the Annals, what is the source? Next you'll try to tell us the Harp in so much of Irelands symbolism is David's harp and not a representation of the classic Celtic harp like the one from Trinity College.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3079 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: 11-21-2003
|
|
Message 185 of 337 (139294)
09-02-2004 9:11 PM
|
|
|
Evidence
The problem is whenever a theist makes a claim and supports it with evidence and source cite(s) immediately opponents categorize the aforementioned as not to be evidence. I have posted and Primordial Egg has posted evidence which clearly says the British Crown lineage is from the Biblical David. In response, we have one person refuting by asserting that the lack of the monarchy website mentioning it means this is not true. Of course this is no refutation whatsoever. Another debater admits they are asserting according to their previous beliefs while resting on someone else doing the same. Until the evidence I have posted is refuted it stands. I will not be coerced into arbitrarily lightening the weight of the evidence which is currently posted. I am going to move on and post more evidence which will surely infuriate you all even more. I want to also debate the OP and its Biblical content. As it stands now the facts of the Biblical claims of the OP are unchallenged. The Jews were never promised to be as the "stars of heaven/sand of the sea." Every website purporting that God failed to keep His word to Abraham is proven wrong. If God did not keep His word to David, that is one of his descendants ruling over "Israel" then the God of the Bible is a mother fucking liar. We don't need a God who will not keep His word. But like the "stars of heaven/sand of the sea" misunderstanding concerning the Jews - God has kept His word to David. I only briefly touched on the Biblical proofs - there is a lot more but I won't mindlessly post this evidence in lieu of no serious debater to debate with. Edit: Here are three sets of evidence. A weblink, an excerpt from another link and an excerpt from still another link: http://www.potts.net.au/data/4/3004.htm
What Jeremiah Planted
by Rev. Bertrand L. Comparet, A.B., J.D. One of the greatest figures in history is the prophet Jeremiah. God commissioned him to carry out a double task: "See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out and to pull down and to destroy and to throw down; TO BUILD AND TO PLANT." (Jeremiah 1:10) His rooting out and throwing down was completed when Nebuchadnezzar's Babylonian army finished the deportation of the Kingdom of Judah to Babylon, its last traces being thrown down when the murder of governor Gedaliah was followed by the flight of the survivors to Egypt, compelling Jeremiah to accompany them, despite his warning against this. But WHAT AND WHERE DID HE PLANT? Historically, the Bible does not tell us, as it last mentions him at Tahpanhes, in Egypt. Just as Jeremiah, in Jerusalem, had warned the people of Judah not to rebel against Babylon, so had Ezekiel, at Babylon, given the same warning, giving the parable of a great eagle which cropped off the top twigs of the cedar tree (an emblem of Judah's royal family), carried it to Babylon and planted it, where it became a low vine; but another eagle came along and the vine grew toward him. Ezekiel says the first eagle is Nebuchadnezzar, and the second is Pharaoh of Egypt, and warns of punishment for breaking the covenant to be a vassal of Babylon. THEN, IN CONTRAST TO WHAT "THE EAGLES" HAVE DONE, GOD SAYS WHAT HE WILL DO: "Thus saith the Lord God: I also will take of the highest branch of the high cedar and will set it; I will crop off from the top of his young twigs A TENDER ONE, and will plant it upon an high mountain and eminent. IN THE MOUNTAIN OF THE HEIGHT OF ISRAEL WILL I PLANT IT: and it shall bring forth boughs and bear fruit and be a goodly cedar: and under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing; in the shadow of the branches thereof shall they dwell." (Ezekiel 17:22-23) Feminine words are used for "young twigs a tender one", though masculine words would have served as well. Nebuchadnezzar killed all the sons of the King of Judah, thinking this destroyed the royal family; but under Israel law, when there were no sons the inheritance went to the daughters. (Numbers 27:8) The 43rd and 44th chapters of Jeremiah record that he, with his scribe Baruch, and the king's daughters, were taken by the remnant of the people to Tahpanhes, in Egypt; there he warned them that they were all doomed, except such as could possibly escape from Egypt. THIS ESCAPE IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE FULFILLMENT OF GOD'S PROPHECY THAT JEREMIAH WOULD "BUILD AND PLANT." Churches which like to call Jeremiah "the prophet of Doom" have created the fable that he died in Egypt: but by this they accuse their God of failure and falsehood, for Jeremiah could only "Build and Plant", as God prophesied, after leaving Egypt; so let us see WHAT JEREMIAH BUILT AND PLANTED AND WHERE. The king's daughters were the "tender twigs" which God said He would plant. Where could Jeremiah have taken them? Remember, it must be to a great Israel nation: "In the mountain in the height of Israel". He did not take them to Babylon, where the people of Judah were captives, for what would have been recorded by Ezekiel and Daniel if it had happened. He would not have been allowed to take them through the Babylonian Empire to where the ten northern Tribes of Israel were by this time known as the Scythians. The record is clear that he did not take them back to the old Kingdom of Judah to stay, though he probably stopped off there long enough to pick up the Ark of the Covenant and Jacob's Pillow, the Stone of Destiny, which had been hidden from the Babylonians. Where else were there Israelite kingdoms? In Greece, in Spain and in Ireland. Historians agree that Greece was barbarous until a high civilization was brought there by settlers who had come from Egypt, but were not Egyptians, being aliens expelled by the Egyptians. These are the DANAOI, seafarers of the Tribe of Dan, who had left Egypt by sea. The date is approximately that of the Exodus of Israel from Egypt. Also near this date, Ireland had been conquered by highly civilized invaders who came by sea, the Tuatha De Danaan, or Tribe of Dan", who ruled Ireland for about 200 years thereafter. Another Hebrew migration from Egypt was that of half of the Royal Tribe of Judah. This Tribe consisted of two branches, respectively the descendants of Pharez and of Zarah. The Zarahites were men of great ability, even Solomon being compared to them in wisdom; but the Pharez branch was considered the older, hence entitled to preference as the Royal line. So, the Zarahites sought other lands where their ability might seek its own level. They settled in Crete, also founded the cities of Troy and Miletus. After the fall of Troy, somewhere near 1,000 B.C., Brutus the Trojan and his followers went to England, founding what became the City of London. Miletus became a great power: Milesian coins bore the Lion of Judah; Milesian mercenary troops were hired by Egypt as its chief Border Guards; and Milesians from Spain, with a considerable fleet and army, conquered the Tuatha De Danaan and settled in Ireland, where Milesian civilization lasted as long as Ireland remained independent. Their language was "Phoenician", which is a Semitic dialect akin to Hebrew and became the Gaelic language of ancient Ireland and Scotland, which even today is nearly identical with Phoenician. The Irish Chronicles also record that the Milesians introduced the Laws of Moses, which remained Irish Law until the time of St. Patrick. Ancient Irish history records that, about 583 B.C., there came to Ireland from Egypt "Ollam Fodhla" (that which means "The Great Prophet"), with "Brugh" his scribe and Tea Tephi, the daughter of a king. Irish tradition has always identified "Ollam Fodhla" as the Prophet Jeremiah; Brugh, his scribe is, of course, Baruch, mentioned in the Bible as Jeremiah's scribe. Near Jeremiah's tomb in Ireland, is a stone inscribed with hieroglyphics which show a star formation which could only have been seen about 583 B.C., which was the time of Jeremiah's migration from Egypt. While the Bible records the capture of the Ark of the Covenant by the Philistines, it does not mention its capture by Babylon, although it does mention their looting the golden vessels of the Temple; hence we may be sure the Ark was safely hidden. In taking the king's daughter on his divinely commanded mission TO BUILD AND TO PLANT, Jeremiah would naturally try to take along the remaining sacred objects. While there is no positive record of his taking the Ark, the Irish Chronicles do record his bringing the Stone of Destiny, Jacob's Pillow; and from Ireland, it is historically traced through Scotland to England, where it is now in the Coronation Chair in Westminster Abbey. The family of a member of our congregation had their genealogy traced and published; and it records that one ancestor came to Ireland with the Prophet Jeremiah, this ancestor's duty being that of Custodian of the Stone of Destine. I might add that this is not mere wishful thinking, for the member who had the genealogy traced and published knew nothing of the identity of the Anglo-Saxon people with the Israel of the Bible. The princess Tea Tephi, brought to Ireland by Jeremiah, is undoubtedly the daughter of King Zedekiah of Judah. She was married to Eochaid, the Heremon (0r Chief King) of Ireland, who was of the Milesian dynasty and therefore of the Zarah branch of the Royal Tribe of Judah: so the two branches of the Royal Tribe were now united in the royal family ruling the free half of Judah. As God said to Jeremiah, He would clip off a tender twig from the highest twigs of the great cedar tree of Judah and plant it "in the mountain of the height of Israel", which was fulfilled by this royal marriage. Jeremiah was a prophet of doom only to the Palestinian Kingdom of Judah and his prophecies were accurate. But this was not the end, for God said "See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out and pull down and to destroy and to throw down but also to BUILD AND TO PLANT." Having finished the rooting out and throwing down, Jeremiah went on to BUILD AND TO PLANT in Ireland, where God's people, Israel, had established a high civilization, just as God had prophesied. Criticism from a Website: The apologists for the belief twist and misuse historical events in a manner that distort the reality of events and confuse the uninitiated. The words and theories may sound important to those who do not know better, but the reality of what is being said is nonsense. The attempt to use Jeremiah 43:4-7 as a proof text for their claim that the 10 tribes travelled to Ireland is ludicrous. The main force of the belief is that the daughter of Zedekiah, princess Tea-Tephi, was accompanied by the prophet Jeremiah to Ireland where she just happened to marry the king of Ireland, who also happened to be a descendant of Judah like herself. It was there that the two established the continuing throne of king David, fulfilling the prophecies in the Old Testament of the Bible. The story is contrived and false. The "proofs" presented in the linguistic claims of place names that contain the word, or variation, or DAN is totally ludicrous. There is no correlation between the Hebrew and English alphabets that would allow such a comparison to be made. If these comparison are allowed, then the Israelites must have also gone east and visited Vietnam where they named the cities of, Danang, Don Duong and others. Note the writer simply asserts the claims are false. At least opponents are consistent in their stinging "refutations". The linguistic similarities of Hebrew tribal names throughout Europe is direct evidence. Opponents just deny it = no refutation. One more link: Page not found | 100777.com This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 09-02-2004 08:52 PM
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 186 by MangyTiger, posted 09-03-2004 12:09 AM | | Cold Foreign Object has replied |
|
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days) Posts: 989 From: Leicester, UK Joined: 07-30-2004
|
Re: Evidence
From Message 164 :
According to the official genealogy chart of the Royal House of Britain...
I'm simply asking for the evidence that you have the official genealogy chart of the Royal House of Britain. You made the claim, it is only fair you substantiate it, correct it* or withdraw it. * I suspect you don't have the official chart - but you do have one which you believe has been properly researched and so has enough supporting evidence to be defended if people challenge it. If so, why didn't you just say so rather than making me ask for the proof at least four times ?
|
Cold Foreign Object
Suspended Member (Idle past 3079 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: 11-21-2003
|
|
|
Message 187 of 337 (139394)
09-03-2004 12:15 AM
|
|
|
More Evidence
The following web link is a scathing refutation attacking who Tea Tephi is. The cut and pasted text is the very last paragraph/conclusion:
Biblemysteries.com Let me make it perfectly clear that although the royal house of Britain is NOT directly descended from King David of Israel through the MALE LINE, it is, in all likelihood, descended from King David through a wife or female descendant of this king who married into the line of Brutus. If this was the case, Queen Elizabeth is descended from Judah through BOTH the lines of Zarah and Pharez. The line of Zarah was brought to Ireland by Heremon the grandson of Calcol; and the line of Pharez came to Britain when Joseph of Arimathea founded the Church of God at Glastonbury. Read our article "The Stone That Roared: The Incredible Story of Lia Fail" for further details of the line of Zarah arriving in Ireland. My point is even this vehement opponent of my claims and his denial of linguistic evidence and bizarre inability to link Jeremiah as the prophet/Ollam Fodhla, and his aide Baruch (Jeremiah 32/36), yet this site RECOGNIZES the Hebrew/Israel and Davidic lineage of the British Crown. Zarah/Pharez = Genesis 38 birthright children. Calcol = descendant of Zara (1Chron.2:6) Joseph of Arimathea exported the gospel to Britain within 10 years of the crucifixion having owned tin mines. Hence, the claim/prophesy of Hosea and Christ telling the disciples to take the gospel FIRST to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. There is only one place in the world which boasts the tomb of Jeremiah - Ireland. This and the fact that "Jeremy" is the most popular male name in that country evidence the Prophets presence. http://www.anycities.com/jahtruth/jere.htm All this supports the previous Biblical claims that God used Jeremiah to plant a tender twig and perpetuate the Davidic lineage thus keeping His word to David and proving the Bible correct.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 188 by jar, posted 09-03-2004 12:31 AM | | Cold Foreign Object has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
No, once again not really.
WILLOWTREE, once again even the sources you supply do not support your position.
Let me make it perfectly clear that although the royal house of Britain is NOT directly descended from King David of Israel through the MALE LINE, it is, in all likelihood, descended from King David through a wife or female descendant of this king who married into the line of Brutus. That is simply more bald assertions with no evidence provided. In all likelyhood from an unnamed wife or unnamed female descendant who married at some unknown time in some unknown way into the line of Brutus. As always WILLOWTREE, you have no evidence.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
Cold Foreign Object
Suspended Member (Idle past 3079 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: 11-21-2003
|
Re: Evidence
Manny: From Message 172 Source: "The Illustrious Lineage of the Royal House of Britain" AVCTORE GV. M. H. MILNER A.M., S.G.R.Soc., I.V.Adsoc. LONDON MCMXXIII Covenant Publishing, London, 1902 The claim is that the content reflects the official genealogy of the Crown. I am truly sorry that you did not know your Queen's lineage. This unknown fact is a very good proof for the existence of the invisible devil whom the Bible claims controls the world. Satan's existence is deduced the exact same way quantum mechanic particles are deduced: by the effects of their presence. Satan has effectively turned the world off to the marvelous performance of God keeping His word to David VIA the cult and racism of British Israelism. Intelligent people cannot even evidence the truth without being branded a racist or cult perpetrator, hence the effect of Satan and his plan to get people to not consider the overwhelming truth of history. Satan WANTS the world to believe that God does not keep His word, hence the net effect will be that mankind will not take seriously the looming judgement of hell and the only way of escape - the gospel/way of faith.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 194 by MangyTiger, posted 09-03-2004 3:20 AM | | Cold Foreign Object has not replied |
|
Cold Foreign Object
Suspended Member (Idle past 3079 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: 11-21-2003
|
|
|
Message 190 of 337 (139407)
09-03-2004 12:36 AM
|
Reply to: Message 188 by jar
09-03-2004 12:31 AM
|
|
Biblemysteries.com Let me make it perfectly clear that although the royal house of Britain is NOT directly descended from King David of Israel through the MALE LINE, it is, in all likelihood, descended from King David through a wife or female descendant of this king who married into the line of Brutus. If this was the case, Queen Elizabeth is descended from Judah through BOTH the lines of Zarah and Pharez. The line of Zarah was brought to Ireland by Heremon the grandson of Calcol; You have intentionally asserted just the opposite of what anyone can read.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 188 by jar, posted 09-03-2004 12:31 AM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 191 by jar, posted 09-03-2004 12:44 AM | | Cold Foreign Object has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Nonsense WILLOWTREE
I used your exact quote. Your very own quote refutes your OP. Let me repeat it and break it down for you?
Let me make it perfectly clear that although the royal house of Britain is NOT directly descended from King David of Israel through the MALE LINE So it is not through the male line.
it is, in all likelihood, descended from King David through a wife or female descendant of this king who married into the line of Brutus. An unsupported assertion. It uses terms like lilkehood, and does not even name the person, time or connection through the Female Line.
If this was the case, Queen Elizabeth is descended from Judah through BOTH the lines of Zarah and Pharez. It says "IF this was the case". That's pretty clear. It is just supposition with no evidence.
The line of Zarah was brought to Ireland by Heremon the grandson of Calcol; That has been refuted a half dozen times in this thread alone.
You have intentionally asserted just the opposite of what anyone can read. I have simply repeated what you provided. The readers, as always, can make their own judgements.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
Cold Foreign Object
Suspended Member (Idle past 3079 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: 11-21-2003
|
|
|
Message 192 of 337 (139421)
09-03-2004 12:52 AM
|
Reply to: Message 191 by jar
09-03-2004 12:44 AM
|
|
Re: Nonsense Jarhead
I posted the opposing link for a purpose which you are desparately trying to cover-up. You conveniently omit the fact that the site vehemently opposes my claims (like I said) but truthfully admits the Hebrew origin of the Isles AND the Crown descending from a female Hebrew heir WHICH HAS BEEN MY CLAIM ALL ALONG. You are engaged in willfull confusing of the evidence and deliberate misrepresentation. Like another theist in this Forum said recently: "I hate a person who posts a response just for the sake of not being refuted".
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 191 by jar, posted 09-03-2004 12:44 AM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 193 by jar, posted 09-03-2004 1:02 AM | | Cold Foreign Object has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Re: Nonsense Jarhead
As a theist, I simply post all the information I have available. Folk can read it and see what was said. They will decide.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days) Posts: 989 From: Leicester, UK Joined: 07-30-2004
|
Re: Evidence
From Message 172 WILLOWTREE writes:
Source: "The Illustrious Lineage of the Royal House of Britain" AVCTORE GV. M. H. MILNER A.M., S.G.R.Soc., I.V.Adsoc. LONDON MCMXXIII Covenant Publishing, London, 1902 The claim is that the content reflects the official genealogy of the Crown. Thanks for the answer WILLOWTREE - it wasn't clear (to me at least ) that this book was your 'official' source. Now I know this it allows me to answer one of your questions, even though it was addressed to Amlodhi rather than me (and despite the fact you probably intended it to be rhetorical !). In Message 178 you asked
What does BI or the Worldwide Church of God have to do with facts of history ? Well the answer is that Covenant Publishing is the publishing arm of the British-Israel-World Federation and the Rev. WMH Milner wrote a variety of books/pamphlets for them (the BIWF). So your source is inextricably linked with British Israelism. This doesn't mean that it is necessarily wrong of course 
|
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days) Posts: 989 From: Leicester, UK Joined: 07-30-2004
|
|
|
Message 195 of 337 (139475)
09-03-2004 4:08 AM
|
Reply to: Message 173 by Amlodhi
09-01-2004 4:14 PM
|
|
Re: Royal House of Britain
I found some more info about Tea-Tephi which you may already know about and decided against mentioning it (as there is no real attempt to back up their claims), but I thought I'd mention it anyway. A couple of Australian ex-members of something called Revival Centers International quote the same Greg Doudna article you did but go a little further and claim to identify the BI proponent who invented Tea-Tethi (see article here). They then go even further and state that the British-Israel-World Federation admitted in 2001 that Tea-Tethi never existed. They give a link to a scanned BIWF article which didn't work for me, but I did a bit of digging around on their site and found it here. You may find that the picture is too small to read - if you doubly click on it a sizing icon will appear which allows you to scale it up. I pointed out to WT in Message 194 that her genealogy source was written by a member of the BIWF and was published by their printing arm. If they really have stated that Tea-Tephi never existed then it seems to me this whole David to QE II claim is going to go down the crapper...
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 173 by Amlodhi, posted 09-01-2004 4:14 PM | | Amlodhi has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 196 by Amlodhi, posted 09-03-2004 11:25 AM | | MangyTiger has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2