THE LOST TRIBES by Editor

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, California · May 12, 1881

THE LOST TRIBES.

By Editor

WE have received several publications with a request to notice, in which the writers endeavor to prove the “Identity of the British Race with the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel.”

Some years ago we spent considerable time in studying about “the lost tribes,” and came to the conclusion that these identity theories are fallacious, and useless if they were not fallacious. And we have never seen reason to change from that conclusion. That they are useless is easily shown.

John the Baptist began his preaching by warning his hearers against attaching any importance to their descent from Abraham. Paul, to the Romans, said he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, but who is one inwardly; that there is no difference between the Jew and the Gentile as to privileges; that the Gentiles are fellow-heirs of the same promises, (Eph. 3:6;) and that they are truly Abraham’s seed who are Christ’s, Gal. 3:28, 29. Also the new covenant was made with the house of Israel and the house of Judah; Heb. 8:8-10. In the latter verse Israel alone is specified. And in chapter 9 we learn that this covenant was ratified by the death of Christ. By comparing Acts 3:25, 26, and 13:44-46, with the prophecies of Jer. 31, and Dan. 9, we learn that this promise to Judah and Israel has been fulfilled; the covenant was ratified and confirmed to both houses before the apostles turned to the Gentiles.

The Saviour himself taught the same thing. He said they are children of Abraham who do the works of Abraham. He also said to a Gentile that he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel; and when he first sent out his apostles he told them not to go to the Gentiles, nor to the Samaritans, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. We believe they fulfilled their commission, and that the ten tribes were lost in the same sense that all mankind were lost, and in no other.

It is of no manner of interest to us to find that we are of Israelitish origin. The Gentiles have equal privileges; are made of the same body; are partakers of the same promises; the Israelites and the Gentiles are constituted heirs of the promises by the same process; for in the gospel there is neither Jew nor Greek, or Gentile, barbarian, Scythian, bond, nor free. Our sole interest is to have assurance that we are Abraham’s seed and partaker of the promises in Christ. All efforts to prove that we are Abraham’s seed by birth, or natural descent, are time and strength wasted on us. And we think the writers, who show so great zeal to prove natural identity, would show a zeal more according to knowledge if they spent their time in leading their readers to become the children of Abraham through faith in Christ. If they value such heirship, or know how to obtain it, we would scarcely learn the fact from their writings.

About the future gathering of Israel we have our views clearly defined in our own mind, in harmony with the truths which we have here so briefly presented. The subject admits of a clear Scriptural solution without resorting to conjectures or even proofs of natural descent.

In looking over a resume of the arguments for that theory, we were sorry to find an expression for which there can be no possible excuse. It is as follows:—

“6. St Peter and St. James in their epistles speak of the Ten Tribes as ‘scattered and dispersed’ in their day. (1 Peter 1:1; James 1:1).”

Peter, in the text cited, addresses “the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.” But he says nothing at all about the ten tribes, or the lost tribes. He speaks to these strangers as then known—not lost; and speaks of them as having obtained mercy through faith in Christ. This term, “strangers,” is applied in the Scriptures to those who were “afar off,” that is, those who were Gentiles, not descended from Israel. See Eph. 2:11-22. There is not the least shadow of a reason for saying that Peter speaks of the ten tribes.

And the error is still more marked in the case of James; for the assertion in this resume is a direct contradiction of the words which James wrote. His text cited says: “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad.” Are there twelve lost tribes? Are we not right in saying there is no excuse for such statements as are put forth by the teachers of this identity theory? It looks like mere recklessness—a determination to make a case, though the utility of the case, if it were made, we are unable to discover. If ever we are made to change our faith on this subject it will be by different arguments and methods from any which we have yet seen.

On the return of Israel, and the promises to Israel in general, we may present an argument in the SIGNS when we find more time than we have at present for its preparation.