THE JEWISH TRIBES.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20519, 22 January 1935, Page 13

THE JEWISH TRIBES.

Dear Sir,—Mr Tucker evades the real issue in his last letter. He omits consideration of the fact that the Sacae and Israel are historically recorded to have been in existence con-

currently and independently. Their identification (which Mr Tucker affirms) is therefore impossible. Even*if it were possible, Britain would still be but one of many nations descended from the Sacae.

The Esdras statement referred to is from Mr Tucker’s own article No. 5. There is no evidence to identify Britain with Tarshish, and I am aware of no scholar tvho does so. Many prophetical theorists do, but merely to suit their theory. J. R. Green is without doubt a scholar of more weight than Waddell, whom I am unable to identify. Green concludes that London is of Roman origin. find, sir, that my statements concerning the Scythians contain no contradiction of the Encyclopaedia Britannica. from which my facts were drawn. Mr Tucker must be aware that the three alternatives he presents do not exhaust the field. Orthodox Christianity has largely held a fourth view—that the prophecies which Mr Tucker holds are fulfilled in Britain must be interpreted spiritually and apply to the Church, the spiritual Israel. This is the only view that can be consistent.. In view of the fact that the altar fire, the. Passover, the Jewish Sabbath, the Levitical priesthood, etc., as well as David’s throne, are the subjects of a " for ever ” promise, there is no logical reason why only the last promise should be literally interpreted. Jonah 2-6 and Jer. 50-39 show that the expression “ for ever ” may have another meaning than the usual. It is not my intention to continue this controversy further unless Mr Tucker can present new evidence on the following points, which mark the rocks upon which the theory is, for me. wrecked :—- (1) Since the main (so-called) Christian nations of the world are descended from the same source, wherein would Christianity be benefited by a proof ot British-Israelism ? This would automatically also prove French-Israelism. etc., yet Christianity gains nothing from this unless these nations first become really Christian. Since the latter is the essential and i£ easily justified, why emphasise the other? (2) Mr Tucker will need to disprove the Encyclopaedia Britannica statement that the Sacae harried the Mesopotamian regions in the seventh century, B.C. If this is true, the Sacae were certainly not Israelites, and thus his historical evidence fails.

(3) Old Testament prophecies are adequately fulfilled spiritually in the New Testament Church, which has sprung from literal Israel and displaced that nation in God’s present dispensation.

In other words, evidence must be offered which adequately shows the practical efficacy, the historical proof and the Scriptural necessity of the theory. , I thank you, sir. for the courtesy of your space in this correspondence, which has been undertaken purely in an endeavour to show that what Brit-ish-Israelism contends to be the oracles of God is composed of no more than the traditions of men.—l am, etc., FIDES.