THE GENTLEMAN WITH THE CLOVEN HOOFS. 41

...

forth the hero is represented as turning next to encounter a lion. ... Now Nimrod, as the son of Cush, was black, in other words, was a negro. Keeping this, then, in mind, it will be seen that in that figure disentombed from Nineveh we have both the prototype of the Anglo-Saxon Zer-Nebo-Gus, 'the seed of the prophet Cush,' ' and the real original of the black adversary of mankind with horns and hoofs"" (Hislop's Two Babylons, p. 55, 3d edition).

The Babylonian Cylinder in green jasper referred to by Layard, and from which the woodcut was made, may now be seen in the British Museum, along with two other cylinders, bearing similar, though not exactly the same design, to one of which the following printed information is attached :-" CYLINDER OF LAPIS LAZULI. To the right Gistubar overcoming a bull, to the left Hea Bani overcoming a lion; between the two are roughly formed characters, about 2000 B.C."

Concluding Remarks.

Lest our readers should misunderstand us in placing these facts before them, we feel it necessary to state, that the testimony given in this chapter does not amount to a direct proof of our Israelitish origin, but seems to throw light on the truly Babylonish heathen source of some of our religious symbols, festivals, and superstitions, which we hold to be unscriptural and foreign to the teachings of Christianity, as revealed to us by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and His Apostles. These idolatrous superstitions were embedded in the national life of our ancestors, for some time prior to their reception of Christianity, and were preserved by their retention as Christian instead of heathen symbols, festivals, and superstitions.

If we have in the least degree wounded the tender susceptibilities of our readers by cutting away from under them any Christian feeling they may have entertained in respect to these deep-rooted customs, we trust we may be forgiven, as our desire is, that they may allow nothing to interfere with their direct communion with our Heavenly Father, who so commendeth His love toward us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ Jesus, His Son, died for us.

PART II.

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.

CHAPTER V.

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED.

Loss of Language.

Q. If the British are a Semitic race, how could she lose her own language and adopt an Aryan?

A. (1.) The Jews of Poland have given up their Hebrew and speak entirely in German.

(2.) The children of the North and South American negro slaves have lost the language of their parent land and speak entirely in English, preserving their national characteristic of features and colours.

(3.) "One other place of considerable reputation in Pamphylia must be briefly noted, viz., Site, a colony of the Cumæans of Æolis, and remarkable for the fact that, soon after they came there they forgot their native Greek tongue, and spoke a barbarous jargon ("Greek Cities and Islands of Asia Minor," by W. S. W. Vaux, p. 102).

(4.) Max Müller classifies "old Armenia " among the Aryan family of tongues.

(5.) Becoming idolatrous, forsaking the study of their sacred Scriptures, their own language dropped into disuse as circumstances compelled them to adopt the language of the people amongst whom they dwelt.

Dwelling in the Tents of Shem.

Q. Noah said that Japheth (Europeans) should dwell in the tents of Shem (Asiatics). Is not our presence in India a fulfilment of the prophecy?

LITERAL INTERPRETATION.

43

A. Gen. ix. 27 is misunderstood and wrongly interpreted. Who is meant by the "he" in the passage "God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem?" Surely "God" is meant. "God shall enlarge," "God shall dwell." Has He not fulfilled His promise by dwelling with Shem in his tabernacle in the wilderness and in the temple at Jerusalem? "I will dwell among the children of Israel and will be their God" (Exod. xxix. 45). "And Hezekiah prayed before the Lord, and said, O Lord God of Israel, which dwellest between the cherubims, Thou art the God" (2 Kings xix. 15). But in a more special sense the promise is fulfilled by God dwelling in the person of Christ Jesus, in whom "dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. ii. 9). Besides, it will be observed that in the Hebrew the "he" is not a separate pronoun, as in the English version; but the verb is in the third person singular, and has consequently "God" as its nominative, "God shall dwell." If it was intended that Japheth should dwell, a definitive pronoun HE would have been inserted in the Hebrew. Strike out he in the English version and the meaning will be clear.

Spiritual and Literal Interpretation.

Q. Why do Israelites insist on the literal interpretation of the Word of God and reject the spiritual?

Commentators and

A. We are misunderstood on this point. ministers, in their interpretation of Scripture, take little notice of the literal meaning of the prophecies as they bear on the future history of the Israelites, and dwell almost exclusively on the application of the passage to the Church. Some even have gone so far as to say that the spiritual Church has supplanted the literal Israel, and that the promises that were made by God to the latter are appropriated by the former. A careful examination of the Scriptures hereafter to be quoted will show the reader how unwarranted such teaching is. The logical conclusion drawn from such statements would be to impugn the faithfulness and unchangeableness of God. In Malachi iii. 6, in the last page of the Old Testament, we are reminded by God, "I am the Lord, I change not."

All admit that the PAST history of the Israelites "happened unto them for ensamples" (1 Cor. x. II), "and are written for our admonition," being types or illustrations of spiritual truths; but this application none will assert does away with the reality of the occurrence as an historical fact. If this be true with regard to the past history of the Israelites, why should not the prophetic statements regarding their future history be equally admitted as literal facts, that will occur in God's own time; that not one word which

44

JEWISH COUNTENANCES.

He has promised will fail? Does not the realisation of such fulfilment literally give us the assurance that they will be fulfilled in us spiritually? In other words, as the history of the Israelites in bondage in Egypt, their deliverance, struggles in the wilderness and Canaan, and final loss of identity, are typical of the experience, suffering, and death of members of the Church militant; so, their restoration and glorious reign over the nations of the earth are typical of the glory and the reign with Christ of the Church triumphant. We should take not only the literal, nor only the spiritual meaning of God's word, but both the literal and the spiritual.

Non-Jewish Cast of Features.

Q. Why are not the British Jewish in appearance?

A. God intended that they should lose their identity and not be recognised as His people (Hosea i. 9; Isa. lxv. 15), while, as regards the Jews, His word says that the "shew of their countenance doth witness against them" (Isa. iii. 9).

"The Jews are divided into three principal divisions: The Sephardim, the Ashkenazim, and the Karaim. Nothing can be more striking than the marked difference in appearance and costume between the Sephardim and Ashkenazim. The former are far superior in culture and manners; they have generally dark complexions, black hair, and regular features; they are fairly industrious and honest; they dress in Oriental costume, and are not wanting in a certain dignity. The Ashkenazim, on the other hand, have pale complexions and flaxen hair, from which two long love-locks hang down, one on either side of the face; and they always wear the long Eastern robe (caftan), with a hat of felt or fur. . . . The Sephardim have a curious tradition that their ancestors were settled in Spain before the date of the Crucifixion, and they thus claim to be exempt from the consequences of the outcry of the Jews, 'His blood be on us and our children "" (Picturesque Palestine, • Part v., p. 118).

...

There is no ground for assuming that the Twelve Tribes were physiologically identical in character. The twelve sons of Jacob were by different mothers. Leah and Rachel, though sisters, were very unlike each other, consequently it is more than probable that their handmaids (in no ways related to them) were unlike either of them. Again, Joseph was married to an Egyptian woman by whom were born Ephraim and Manasseh. Paul, a Benjamite, was mistaken for an Egyptian (Acts xxi. 38); Jonah, a man of Zebulun, was not recognised as a Hebrew (Jonah i. 8).

MANY TRIBES YET ONE PEOPLE.

A Mixed People.

45

Q. We must admit that the British are but the outcome of many races, the mixtures of Celts, Latins, Danes, Norse, Spaniards, and many other populations. How could a mixed people such as the English, having no claim whatever to be called a distinct race, be the racial descendants of the Ten Tribes, carried away under Pekah and Hoshea?

A. The onus of proving that we are mixed of many races lies with our opponents. How can a bottle of mixed pickles contain a variety of vegetables? How can curry be called a purely Indian dish, seeing it is composed of many ingredients, such as clarified butter, meat, salt, turmeric, spices, &c.? The answer to the last question would in all probability be, It is the mixture that makes the dish. We assert, therefore, that as Israel consisted of several tribes, so the English if of Ten-Tribed Israel must be expected to consist also of different tribes; which is the case, as admitted by our opponents, only they are pleased to call them "distinct races," contrary to the opinion expressed by competent writers quoted in the first chapter of this book. Thus, the Cimbri, called also Cymri, Beth Khumri (House of Khumro, Samaria), Gimiri (meaning tribes), and which Sir Henry Rawlinson informs us "is the Semitic equivalent of the Aryan name Saka or Sakai,” also called Saco, Scythians, Skuthai, Scoti, &c. Now Strabo (book xi. viii. 4), says that the Sakai got possession of the most fertile tract of Armenia, which was called after their own name, Saccasena, and so named in ancient existing maps: hence Saxonia, Saxon. Similarly the Celts, Keltai, Gauls, Angles, Danes, Normans, Jutes, Frisians, Scots, Picts, &c., were "different tribes, or clan divisions," "of one race,' one people." The following statement made by Professor Huxley is in support of the above, in addition to the quotations referred to in Part i., chapter 1, of this work :

:

99 66

"The invasion of the Saxons, Jutes, Danes, and Northmen (Normans) changed the language of Britain, but added no new physical element; therefore we must not any more talk of Celts and Saxons, for ALL ARE ONE. I never lose an opportunity of rooting up the false idea that the Celts and Saxons are different races. . . So then the upshot is that WE ARE ALL ONE people."

The Afghans.

Q. Dr. Bellew, in a lecture given at the United Service Institute, Simla, in 1880, stated that the Afghans were descendants of the lost Ten Tribes. How then can the British be Israelites ?