Aaron Dean denies anti-British Israelism UCG rumor

Aaron Dean

Gavin Rumney has the following at his website:

February 16, 2016

This blog is often, and very fairly, labelled ‘critical’ in its dealings with the family of sects that have evolved from the Worldwide Church of God. A lot of the people who comment here have, like this writer, “done time” in that movement.

So why do we bother? What’s our point? What would we like to see happen?

The answers vary from person to person. I was brought up short by these comments submitted for a recent thread.

Congratulations to those who have been hammering against British Israelism recently. It’s really paying off now as the morons in charge of UCG are just about to give up on it. When they do, we can ridicule them for dropping a major plank of Armstrongism. Either way they lose big time.

How would you characterise those comments? My reaction: speak for yourself brother.

For me, there are three major pillars of Armstrongism that are fair game. More than fair game, they need to be continually exposed to fresh air and light for all to see. These are:

Racism (e.g. British-Israelism)

Anti-intellectualism, a kneejerk reaction to social and scientific progress (e.g. creationism)

Authoritarianism, exclusivism and non-accountability (e.g. church government)

I don’t know what the contributor quoted above wants to see, but I get the feeling that he won’t settle for anything less than a complete crash and burn so he can toast marshmallows in the embers.

Gaving Rumney, himself, lives in New Zealand. He was once part of the old Worldwide Church of God, but has turned against most of its doctrines.

Anyway, after looking at his post, I telephoned Aaron Dean, who is on the Council of Elders of the United Church of God (UCG) to get his comments on these rumors for this Church of God News page.

Aaron Dean went on the record and stated that no, the United Church of God is NOT entertaining any proposals to stop teaching what is often called British-Israelism. He strongly denied the claims, etc. on Gavin Rumney’s website.

Many who were once in the old Worldwide Church of God might recall that Aaron Dean was the late Herbert W. Armstrong’s closest personal adviser for probably the last several years of his life.

Now, I would like to debunk some of the arguments that some have raised about British-Israelism.

Not Racist

First, the version of ‘British-Israeliem’ that we in the Continuing Church of God endorse is NOT racist, it is biblical.

It is a fact that everyone had to descend from someone in the past, so having an idea of from whom the nations descended can assist in better understanding biblical prophecy–especially since the Bible gives a variety of genealogies and prophecies related to some mentioned in them. It is not racist to believe the facts.

The Bible specifically teaches that the birthright through Abraham, Isaac and then Jacob was given to Joseph and not to Reuben (the firstborn) or Judah (from whom Christ traced His genealogy):

1 Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel–he was indeed the firstborn, but because he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph, the son of Israel, so that the genealogy is not listed according to the birthright; 2 yet Judah prevailed over his brothers, and from him came a ruler, although the birthright was Joseph’s (1 Chronicles 5:1-2).

The birthright was originally Reuben’s. When it comes to wealth and territory, Reuben-France sold off much territory in the form of the Louisiana Purchase to the then rising U.S.A. in 1803. This could have marked a transfer of birthright blessings to the descendants of Joseph at that time (more information on this tribe is in the article The ‘Lost Tribe’ of Reuben: France in Prophecy?; a two-part sermon related to history and prophecy is available online: The ‘Lost Tribe’ of Reuben and France and Prophecy).

The birthright, while conferring physical blessings, does NOT mean that only those who are of physical Israel can be saved (Romans 11).

I, myself, am not a physical Israelite, and thus can proclaim that we in the Continuing Church of God do believe that salvation is available now and in the future (Revelation 7:9-10) to people of all races and ethnic groups (see also God’s Grace is For All). We teach against racial prejudice (e.g. LOVE AND SALVATION FOR ALL RACES AND PEOPLES. Statement of Beliefs of the Continuing Church of God. © 2016 Continuing Church of God).

Hence, we in the Continuing Church of God are NOT part of the so-called “Christian Identity movement,” even though we do teach a form of British-Israelism that understands that physical blessings (along with curses for disobedience) were promised to those that are now the primary Anglo-American nations in the world. We do not go along with those who have hateful racist motives associated with believing some of what the Bible teaches.

We in the Continuing Church of God do consider that those in the United Kingdom are British Israelites and that those in the United States, Canada, etc. are also Anglo-Saxon-Israelites. However, we do not teach that the physical blessings promised to the descendants of Israel mean that non-Israelites are not now being saved–the Apostles were quite clear that salvation is available to Gentile peoples (Acts 11:1-18)–and since I am a Gentile, I am among those who benefit from the biblical teachings here.

Furthermore, those of the “Christian Identity movement” tend to advocate the destruction of other peoples and the rise of the Anglo-Saxon peoples. Yet, we faithful in the Continuing Church of God understand that the Anglo-American nations received blessings from God, but are likely to be destroyed soon without massive repentance. We do NOT teach the superiority of any race, though we acknowledge that various races can have differing strengths and weaknesses.

Also, while we in the Continuing Church of God do accept that God promised physical blessings to Joseph’s descendants, we do teach that those descendants are subject to various curses that God also promised. Specifically we teach that the Great Tribulation will first hit the nations descended from Joseph.

Hence we teach that although the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA have benefited from God’s blessings through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob/Israel, we also teach that the people of the nations will also receive the curses that God warns for those who turn away from Him. Believing that God gave promises and curses for the descendants of various people is not racist.

God loves peoples of all races and so should all Christians. Spiritually, in Christ, races are the same (Galatians 3:28) and subject to the spiritual blessings that were promised to Abraham (Galatians 3:28-29).

Not Anti-Intellectual

Second, it is astounding how often pseudo-intellectuals falsely claim that biblical doctrines are anti-intellectual. It is so bad that many pseudo-intellectuals do not feel that there are any views that should differ from theirs for evolution (watch for example Is There Another View of Evolution? and/or another titled Quickly Disprove Evolution as the Origin of Life). Yet, those who believe real science realize that the current evolutionary model that many embrace is scientifically. This is documented in the articles Is God’s Existence Logical? and Is Evolution Probable or Impossible or Is God’s Existence Logical? Part II.

As far as British-Israelism goes, some have suggested that it is anti-intellectual, but that is not the case. While it does not have most ‘scientists’ behind it, I have found that there is somewhat of a ‘herd mentality’ in the so-called scientific community. Which means, if something is considered widely accepted, most scientists and pseudo-scientists proclaim and defend it, whether or not they have actually examined it themselves.

And that is the case of British-Israelism.

Some oppositions, called “science” or “knowledge” by the world cannot be trusted:

20 … keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. (1 Timothy 6:20-21, KJV)

20 … Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge — 21 by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith. Grace be with you. Amen. (1 Timothy 6:20-21, NKJV)

Sadly, various ones who have strayed from the faith (fallen away) have misled themselves that scientific knowledge backs their anti-biblical positions.

The Bible says:

4 Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. (Romans 3:4)

35 Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35)

So, if one really believes the Bible, then it makes it easier to determine which positions ‘intellectuals’ have may actually be correct.

As far back as the Book of Genesis, God promised Abram that he would be the father of many nations:

4 As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you, and you shall be a father of many nations. 5 No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you a father of many nations. 6 I will make you exceedingly fruitful; and I will make nations of you, and kings shall come from you (Genesis 17:4-6).

Notice that the promise was for Abraham’s descendants to be “many nations”—this simply is not fulfilled by the split into the two nations of Judah and Israel (1 Kings 12:17-20) in the Old Testament.

Herbert W. Armstrong noted that the Bible taught something interesting about God’s promises to Abraham:

Notice now again how God first called Abram, and the twofold nature of His promises: “Now the Eternal had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will show thee: And I will make of thee a GREAT NATION … and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” (Gen. 12:1-3).

Notice the twofold promise: 1) “I will make thee a GREAT NATION” — the national, material promise that his flesh-born children should become a great nation … 2) “… and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” — the spiritual promise of GRACE. This same promise is repeated in Genesis 22:18: “And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” This particular “one seed” refers to Christ, as plainly affirmed in Galatians 3:8, 16.

Right here is where those who profess to be “Christians” — and their teachers — have fallen into error and scriptural blindness. They have failed to notice the twofold promise God made to Abraham. They recognize the messianic promise of spiritual salvation through the “one seed” – Christ…

We have seen how both sets of promises, right of birth and gift of grace, were unconditionally made by God to Abraham. Both the birthright and the sceptre were repromised by the Eternal to Isaac and to Jacob. But the fact that should open your eyes, as a joyous truth newly discovered, is that from that point these two sets of promises became separated! The sceptre promises of the kingly line culminating in Christ, and of grace through Him, were handed on to JUDAH, son of Jacob and father of all Jews. But the astonishing truth is that the birthright promises were never given to the Jews!

Let that be repeated! Realize this! The birthright promises were never given to the Jews!

Turn to these passages — read them in your own Bible!

“The sceptre shall not depart from Judah …” (Gen. 49:10).

“… But the birthright was Joseph’s” (I Chron. 5:2).

Of course it is well understood that the sceptre went to Judah and was handed down through the Jews. King David was of the tribe of Judah. All succeeding kings of David’s dynasty were of the House of David, tribe of Judah. Jesus Christ was born of the House of David and the tribe of Judah (Armstrong HW. THE UNITED STATES AND BRITAIN IN PROPHECY. 1954, 1967, 1972, 1975, 1980 edition).

This is perhaps one of the biggest misunderstandings that mainstream theologians have—they simply do not realize that God gave both physical and spiritual promises to Abraham and that since the physical promises were NOT fulfilled by the Jews, that they had to somehow be fulfilled in these last days.

Speaking of theologians, the late Protestant minister Walter Martin claimed that Amos disproved Anglo-Israelism. Notice what he wrote:

The coup de grace to Anglo-Israelism’s fragmented exegesis is given by the prophet Amos of Judah…(Amos, dwelling in Bethel, prophesied against Israel’s restoration as a separate kingdom [Amos 9:8-12]). We learn from this prophecy that as a kingdom, the ten-tribes were to suffer destruction, and their restoration would never be realized. How then is it possible for them to be ‘lost’ and reappear three millenniums later as the British Kingdom when that Kingdom was never to be restored? (Martin W. Martin W. The Kingdom of the Cults. Baker Books, 2003, p. 518)

Let’s look at what Amos actually wrote:

8 “Behold, the eyes of the Lord God are on the sinful kingdom,
And I will destroy it from the face of the earth;
Yet I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob,”
Says the Lord.

9 “For surely I will command,
And will sift the house of Israel among all nations,
As grain is sifted in a sieve;
Yet not the smallest grain shall fall to the ground.

10 All the sinners of My people shall die by the sword,
Who say, ‘The calamity shall not overtake nor confront us.’ (Amos 9:8-10)

Consider that Amos 9:8-10 teaches that God would make it so the ancient kingdom of Israel would no longer be able to exist (it still does not), that Jacob though would still remain (his descendants still do), that those people would be sifted through the nations (which they have been), and that the sinners among them will be punished (which will happen)—since those of us in the CCOG believe all that, we would tend to state that Amos 9:8-10 supports, and does not disprove, British-Israelism (Amos 9:11-12 talk about restoration).

British-Israelism, as understood in the CCOG, does not mean all ten tribes became the British Empire, but mainly one, along with another that became the USA.

Perhaps it should also be noted that Jeremiah 51:5-6, especially when compared to Revelation 18:2-6 and Ezekiel 37:15-26, clearly shows that into the present century that God still considers that Israel is separate from Judah; thus, despite comments from critics, the Bible does teach many aspects of “British-Israelism.” People who claim to be Christian should believe the Bible.

While most religious commentators understand the passages from Jacob in Genesis 48 & 49 to be prophetic, many seem to improperly conclude that they have been fulfilled long ago. Notice what the late renowned Protestant theologian John F. Walvoord wrote:

In general, the prophecies that Jacob bestowed on his children have been fulfilled in their subsequent history (Walvoord, John F. The Prophecy Handbook. Victor Books, Wheaton (IL), 1990, p. 33).

That statement above is outrageously inaccurate. Many Protestants simply do not understand where the USA is mentioned in prophecy (see also Protestant and Church of God views of the United States in Bible Prophecy).

Not only have most NOT been fulfilled historically, these prophesies were for the last days. (Information on the ‘ten lost tribes’ is also in the YouTube sermon titled Where are the Ten Lost Tribes? Why does it matter?)

It was during the time of the New Testament that the last days began (Hebrews 1:2), and no commentator (outside of those who accept that there are still tribes of Israel that are not affiliated with the nation now called Israel) has been able to show how the prophecies of Genesis 49:1-27 were fulfilled in “the latter days”. Nor have I seen any of them explain who “the multitude of nations” that were to descend from Ephraim are.

Furthermore notice what was told to the wife of Isaac:

60 “Our sister, may you become
The mother of thousands of ten thousands;
And may your descendants possess
The gates of those who hate them” (Genesis 24:60).

The above was NOT fulfilled by ancient Israel in the area of Palestine.

The historic reality is that for many years, the major sea gates of the world were possessed/controlled by the United States (Panama Canal and certain locations in the Pacific ocean) and the British Empire (Straits of Malacca, Singapore, Suez Canal, Bab el Mandeb, Strait of Hormuz, Simon’s Town/Cape of Good Hope, etc.). And while that is no longer the case for many of them, they seem to have been prophesied to be taken away for disobedience as well (cf Deuteronomy 28)—and certainly these nations have disobeyed the God of Abraham. It is likely that the remaining “sea gates” that the UK has such as Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands will be separated from UK control (see also Will the UK Lose Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands?).

While Abraham’s descendants were promised various blessings, notice that the Bible make a a distinction between Sarah’s and Hagar’s sons through Abraham:

15 Then God said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name. 16 And I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her.” (Genesis 17:15-16)

21 Whatever Sarah has said to you, listen to her voice; for in Isaac your seed shall be called. (Genesis 21:12)

Since Sarah Abraham’s wife was promised to be the mother of “nations” this shows that there are nations descended from Sarah’s only son Isaac—hence the descendants of Abraham, Isaac’s sons, not Ishmael is what God is referring to here.

Furthermore, notice God said to Abraham that his seed would be called after Isaac. Hence, they would not be known as Abrahamites or something similar, but something derived from the word Isaac.

If you believe the Bible, you must realize that somehow some had to be named after Isaac. Well, if we look at history, we see the Scythians (Colossians 3:11) as well as a group known as Isaac’s sons, the Saxons!

Just because many scientists do not believe the Bible does not mean this is not so.

It may be of interest to note that it is believed that the term “Saxon” is derived from expressions meaning related to the descendants of Isaac, or Isaac’s sons. Notice the following reports and assertions:

Wherein, by the advice of all, it was determin’d, that the Saxons were invited into Britain…They were thought by good writers (Florent. Wigorn ad. an. 370) to be descended of the Saca, a kind of Scythian in the north of Asia, thence call’d Sacasons, or sons of Sacae, who with a flood of other northernnations came into Europe (Milton J. Britain under Trojan, Roman, Saxon Rule. By John Milton.-England under Richard III. By Sir T. More.-The reign of Henry VII. By F. Bacon … Verbatim reprint from Kennet’s England, Ed. 1719. A. Murray & Son, 1870 Original from The British Library Digitized, Jul 26, 2013, pp. 74-75)

The Saxons were a… Scythian tribe; and of the various Scythian nations which have been recorded, the Sakai, or Sacae, are the people from whom the descent of the Saxons may be inferred with the least violation of probability. Sakai-suna or the sons of Sakai, abbreviated into Saksun, which is the same sound as Saxon, seems a reasonable etymology of the word Saxon. The Sakai, who in Latin are called Sacae, were an important branch of the Scythian nation. They were so celebrated, that the Persians called all the Scythians by the name of Sacae; and Pliny, who mentions this, speaks of them as among the most distinguished people of Scythia (Pliny, lib. vi. c.19). Strabo places them eastward of the Caspian…

This important fact of a part of Armenia having been named Sakasina, is mentioned by Strabo in another place (Strabo, p.124), and seems to give a geographical locality to our primeval ancestors, and to account for the Persian words that occur in the Saxon language; as they must have come into Armenia from the northern regions of Persia.

That some of the divisions of this people were really called SAKASUNA, is obvious from Pliny; for he says that the SAKAI, who settled in Armenia, were named SACASSANI (Pliny. lib. vi. c.11); which is but SAKASUNA spelt by a person unacquainted with the meaning of the combined words. And the name SACASENA (Strabo. lib. Xi. pp. 776, 778), which they gave to the part of Armenia they occupied, is nearly the same sound as SAXONIA. It is also important to remark, that Ptolemy mentions a Scythian people sprung from the Sakai, by the name of SAXONES. If the Sakai who reached Armenia were called Saca-sani, they may have traversed Europe with the same appellation; which being pronounced by the Romans from them, and then reduced to writing from their pronunciation, may have been spelt with the x instead of the ks, and thus SAXONS would not be a greater variation from SACASSANI or SAKSUNA than we find between French, Francois, Franci, and their Greek name, Phraggi; or between Spain, Espagne, Hispania(Turner S. The History of The Anglo-Saxons, also known as The History of England: From the Earliest Period to the Death of Elizabeth, Volume I, 3rd edition. 1820, Longman, Orme, Brown, Green, and Longmans, pp.115-116).

Turner is undoubtedly correct in saying that the “ks” was changed to an “x.” These variations of the word Sacae (or Saka) are not any greater, says Turner, than the variations of names for such modern nations as France and Spain (ibid. pp.87, 88, 95).

He then says that Ptolemy placed another people, the Sasones, north of the Sacae. These have been selected as our ancestors… Sasones, Sacaesons, Saxones (ibid., fn., p. 95).

Turner then mentions that some of these marauding Sakai or Saca-sana were, in all probability, gradually propelled to the west coast of Europe, on which they were found by Ptolemy, and from which they made incursions into the Roman Empire, in the third century A.D. A people known as the Saxoi, lived on the Black Sea, according to Stephanus (Stephanus de urb. et Pop. p. 657). (McNair R. Key to Northwest European Origins. 1963, pp. 94-95)

According to Greek and Iranian sources the Assyrians planted colonies in the region of Kabul and Gandahara to the east of Hara…According to local tradition the eastern part of Hara (“Ghor”), where the Hara river rises was once settled by people referred to as “Asaakan” and Bnei Yisrael”. “Assakan” was shortened to “Sak” or “Sok” and local muslim lore equated the term the name “Isaac”, father of Israel…The Royal family, for instance, had a tradition that they had descended from the Tribe of Benjamin…The existence of these names are evidence that a section of the Israelite nation had once been in that area, and these are apparently to be identified with the historical “Sok” or “Sakae” (meaning Scythians) who were in the Hara region from at least around 600 b.c.e. (if not earlier)…In about 676 a new element known that the Ishkuza emerged from the Cimmerian ranks, these are identified with the Scythians whom the Persians and Babylonians referred to as “Saka”: Both the names “Ishkuza” and “Saka” may be understood as forms for the name “Isaac” (Davidy Y. The Tribes. Rabbinical approbation: Rabbi Abraham Feld of the Maccabee Institute Jerusalem, July 4, 1993. Russell-Davis Publishers, Hebron (Israel), pp. 22-23,28).

(Note: There are two books cited called “The Tribes” throughout this article, the 1993 edition where the author spells his name Davidy, and the 2011 edition where the same author spells his name Davidiy.)

Furthermore, notice what God promised to Sarah’s grandson Jacob:

14 Also your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth; you shall spread abroad to the west and the east, to the north and the south; and in you and in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed (Genesis 28:14).

11 Also God said to him: “I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall proceed from you, and kings shall come from your body (Genesis 35:11).

Thus it should be clear to those willing to see that the descendants of Jacob would include multiple nations, and not be limited to just the area of Palestine. The USA and Canada are clearly west of Palestine (see also Who is the King of the West?). The old British Commonwealth would seem to fit the description of “a company of nations.” And the nations of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, along with the territories of Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands still do to this day. Those with Anglo-Saxon minorities (in the Caribbean, Asia, and Southern Africa) have since lost control to the non-Israelites among them (cf. Deuteronomy 28:43).

And this expansion to a group of nations simply did not happen to the ancient nations of Judah and Israel.

Furthermore, notice these prophecies for the latter days by Jacob:

1 And Jacob called his sons and said, “Gather together, that I may tell you what shall befall you in the last days:

2 “Gather together and hear, you sons of Jacob, And listen to Israel your father…

22 “Joseph is a fruitful bough, A fruitful bough by a well; His branches run over the wall.
23 The archers have bitterly grieved him, Shot at him and hated him.
24 But his bow remained in strength, And the arms of his hands were made strong
By the hands of the Mighty God of Jacob (From there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel),
25 By the God of your father who will help you, And by the Almighty who will bless you
With blessings of heaven above, Blessings of the deep that lies beneath, Blessings of the breasts and of the womb.
26 The blessings of your father Have excelled the blessings of my ancestors, Up to the utmost bound of the everlasting hills.
They shall be on the head of Joseph, And on the crown of the head of him who was separate from his brothers (Genesis 49:1-2,22-26).

It is only the United States and the groups of English nations now composed of the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand who have historically fulfilled these prophecies given to Abraham and his descendants (and they are separated from their “brothers” on continental Europe, Ireland, and Iceland). Specifically they are descendants of Joseph, and sometimes called “Jacob” or “Israel” in scripture. Perhaps it should be pointed out that a “fruitful bough” with “branches run over the wall” implies a colonizing people–and perhaps no peoples did more colonizing than the British.

Yet, oddly, most theologians and ministers pass right over what God promised and do not consider that the existence of ‘Saxons’ or Scythians fulfills biblical prophecy.

But we in the Continuing Church of God accept what the Bible teaches on that. And groups like UCG still hold to various versions of it as well.

Some have claimed that DNA disproves British-Israelism. But consider that in 2010 it was reported “that when teams of geneticists led by Professor Bryan Sykes took DNA samples in the Celtic regions of Britain they discovered ancestries in the Caucasus, which lay within ancient Scythia, and Mediterranean Europe” (Hutchinson R. Book review: The Highland Clans, by Alistair Moffat. The Scotsman – April 26, 2010. http://news.scotsman.com/features/Book-review-The-Highland-Clans.6223804.jp viewed o4/26/10). Thus, the travels of these descendants seems to have some modern support.

Notice also the following:

Atlantic Modal Haplotype #3 The most common variant of the Atlantic Modal Haplotype in the YHRD database has DYS389i,ii values of 13 and 29, and DYS385a,b values of 11 and 14. This haplotype differs by one step upward on the most quickly mutating marker. This haplotype is very interesting, from the perspective of the YHRD database, because most of the top frequencies are not in Europe but in the United States. Of the top twenty, twelve are among U.S. populations. Two are Hispanic samples, three are African-American (most likely of Anglo-American origin), and the rest are European American. These samples seem to congregate in areas of the U.S. settled by French, Scottish, English, Irish and German immigrants. That accords with the Western European origin of AMH. Southern Ireland and London, England appear among the top ten European frequencies, along with four separate locales in The Netherlands. Although “Border Reiver” descendants would most likely have acquired this haplotype through British “Celtic” ancestry, the multiple hits in The Netherlands suggest that an Anglo-Saxon origin is also quite possible. (Haplogroup R1b (Atlantic Modal Haplotype). http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gallgaedhil/haplo_r1b_amh_13_29.htm viewed 12/08/12)

The above tends to confirm observations made by the late Raymond McNair and others that those who made it to the area of the USA, for example, were somehow different than other Europeans (like Germans) that they lived near, but who stayed in Europe. Yair Davidiy has written that the Germans who ended up in America came from areas of Germany dominated by Manasseh (Davidiy, p. 403)–he also reported that, while skeptical of earlier DNA claims, that more recent DNA tests tended to confirm the view that the scattered tribes in Europe and elsewhere descended from Israel was correct (Davidiy, p. 495).

Though controversial, based upon the information above on Atlantic Modal Haplotype #3, travels, and other data, Raymond G. Helmer concluded:

In short – haplotype R1b came to the United States from exactly the immigrants that we would expect to carry it. (Helmer RG. THE BLOOD OF MANKIND – PART III THE BLOOD OF AMERICA. (http://www.helmerspoint.com/uploads/4/0/0/2/4002281/the_blood_of_mankind_iii.pdf)

Thus, there is physical evidence. The haplotype evidence also suggests that the British were different than those who remained on the continent of Europe.

More on the British-American-Israel connection can be found in the article Anglo – America in Prophecy & the Lost Tribes of Israel.

One certainly can be intellectually honest and be in the Church of God. Yet, I do not believe one can be intellectually honest and not be in (or at some point being drawn toward) the Church of God.

Authoritarian

Third, most humans trust governments of this world above the Bible.

But British-Israelism teaches that God will implement the government known as the Kingdom of God.

And yes, God is in top authority. More on proper theological governance can be found in the article The Bible, Peter, Paul, John, Polycarp, Herbert W. Armstrong, Roderick C. Meredith, and Bob Thiel on Church Government.

Accountability?

Well “God is love” (1 John 4:8,16) and “cannot lie” (Titus 1:2). His government leaders are accountable to Him.

Exclusivity?

God predestines (Romans 8:29-30; Ephesians 1:5,11) and calls (John 6:44).

Who does God want?

2 For all those things My hand has made,
And all those things exist,”
Says the Lord.
“But on this one will I look:
On him who is poor and of a contrite spirit,
And who trembles at My word. (Isaiah 66:2)

23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth. (John 4:23-24)

God SEEKS THOSE WHO WILL WORSHIP HIM IN TRUTH. But many prefer their own traditions or to believe things contrary to the Bible.

While God will offer salvation to all, this was not prophesied for this age, but for the age to come (see also Universal Offer of Salvation: There Are Hundreds of Verses in the Bible Supporting the Doctrine of True Apocatastasis).

Anyway, many critics do not believe what the Bible teaches. And many seemingly accept rumors as facts without attempting to confirm the truth.

Some items of related interest may include:

Anglo – America in Prophecy & the Lost Tribes of Israel Are the Americans, Canadians, English, Scottish, Welsh, Australians, Anglo-Saxon (non-Dutch) Southern Africans, and New Zealanders descendants of Joseph? Where are the lost ten-tribes of Israel? Who are the lost tribes of Israel? What will happen to Jerusalem and the Jews in Israel? Will God punish the U.S.A., Canada, United Kingdom, and other Anglo-Saxon nations? Why might God allow them to be punished first? Here is a link to the Spanish version of this article: Anglo-América & las Tribus Perdidas de Israel. A video of possible interest may be Will Will USA Spying Help the Beast Power?.
Will the Anglo-Saxon Nations be Divided and Have People Taken as Slaves? Will the lands of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand be divided? What about Jerusalem? What does Bible prophecy teach? Are there non-biblical prophecies that support this idea? Who will divide those lands? Who will end up with the lands and the people? Here is a link to a video titled Will the USA and other Anglo-nations be Divided and Their People Made Slaves? Here is a related item in the Spanish language ¿Serán divididas las naciones anglosajonas?
British are the Covenant People What do ‘British’ and ‘Britain’ mean in Hebrew? Are the descendants of the Anglo-Saxons people of the covenant? Does the British royal family connect to the throne of David? What does the Bible teach? What does history show us? Is there any DNA evidence related to British-Israelism? When did Christianity make it to the British Isles? Could Jeremiah have made it to the British Isles? What type of Christians made it to the British Isles? Did the last King of England believe in British Israelism?
Is God’s Existence Logical? Some say it is not logical to believe in God. Is that true? Here is a link to a YouTube sermon titled Is it logical to believe in God?
Is Evolution Probable or Impossible or Is God’s Existence Logical? Part II This short article clearly answers what ‘pseudo-scientists’ refuse to acknowledge. Here is a link to a YouTube video titled Is There Another View of Evolution? and another titled Quickly Disprove Evolution as the Origin of Life.
Tradition and Scripture: From the Bible and Church Writings Are traditions on equal par with scripture? Many believe that is what Peter, John, and Paul taught. But did they? A related sermon is titled Tradition and Scripture.
The Bible, Peter, Paul, John, Polycarp, Herbert W. Armstrong, Roderick C. Meredith, and Bob Thiel on Church Government What form of governance did the early church have? Was it hierarchical? Which form of governance would one expect to have in the Philadelphia remnant? The people decide and/or committee forms, odd dictatorships, or the same type that the Philadelphia era itself had? What are some of the scriptural limits on ecclesiastical authority? Do some commit organizational idolatry? Here is a Spanish language version La Biblia, Policarpo, Herbert W. Armstrong, y Roderick C. Meredith sobre el gobierno de la Iglesia. Here is a link to a sermon titled Church Governance.
Universal Offer of Salvation: There Are Hundreds of Verses in the Bible Supporting the Doctrine of True Apocatastasis Do you believe what the Bible actually teaches on this? Will all good things be restored? Will God call everyone? Will everyone have an opportunity for salvation? Does God’s plan of salvation take rebellion and spiritual blindness into account? Related sermon videos include Universal Offer of Salvation I: God is love and Universal Offer of Salvation II: The Age to Come and the ‘Little Flock’ and Universal Offer of Salvation III: All Are to Know Jesus, But When? and Universal Offer of Salvation IV: Will the Guilty be Pardoned? and Universal Offer of Salvation V: All Israel Will be Saved? A version of the main article was also translated in the Spanish language: Oferta universal de salvación: Hay cientos de versículos en la Biblia que apoyan la verdadera doctrina de la Apocatastasis.
When Will the Great Tribulation Begin? 2016, 2017, or 2018? Can the Great Tribulation begin today? What happens before the Great Tribulation in the “beginning of sorrows”? What happens in the Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord? Is this the time of the Gentiles? When is the earliest that the Great Tribulation can begin? What is the Day of the Lord? Who are the 144,000? Here is a version of the article in the Spanish language: ¿Puede comenzar la Gran Tribulación en 2016 o 2017? ¿Es el Tiempo de los Gentiles? You can also see the English language sermon video: The Great Tribulation from the Mount of Olives. A shorter video is: Can the Great Tribulation Start in 2016?