The 'Lost Tribe' of Reuben: France in Prophecy?

By COGwriter

What is the origin of many of the people in France? Could they be part of the 'ten lost tribes' of Israel? If so, what will happen to this area according to Bible prophecy? Did descendants of Reuben settle in France?

Many have attempted to answer these questions. This article is intended as a compilation of information from numerous sources, including the Bible to provide at least partial answers to those questions.

For many years I had personal contact with the late Church of God evangelist Dibar Apartian, and have included a lot of his writings, along with others in this article.

Although my use of scriptures will normally be for the NKJV (unless otherwise specified), other sources used other translations. In the case of Dibar Apartian, his original paper was written in the French language and then later translated into English, and the NKJV was not used.

Since God had Jacob give the prophecies for the tribes, it should be clear that somehow God would make them come to pass. Notice the following:

11'For thus says the Lord GOD: "Indeed I Myself will search for My sheep and seek them out. 12 As a shepherd seeks out his flock on the day he is among his scattered sheep, so will I seek out My sheep and deliver them from all the places where they were scattered on a cloudy and dark day (Ezekiel 34:11-12).

So even though they were scattered and their locations "cloudy and dark," this does not mean that they would not fulfill God's plan. A two-part sermon related to history and prophecy is available online: The 'Lost Tribe' of Reuben and France and Prophecy.

Reuben Mentioned

The first mention of Reuben is in the Book of Genesis:

32 So Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben; for she said, "The Lord has surely looked on my affliction. Now therefore, my husband will love me." (Genesis 29:32-33)

Leah was Jacob's first wife. But he preferred her sister, his second wife, Rachel.

Reuben is mentioned in other scriptures, and is the brother he tried to stop what several of the others wanted to do as well as did to Joseph (Genesis 37:21-22). He also long felt sorry for what happened to Joseph (Genesis 42:22).

Reuben was the Firstborn of Israel, But ...

Reuben was the firstborn of Israel:

8 Now these were the names of the children of Israel, Jacob and his sons, who went to Egypt: Reuben was Jacob's firstborn. (Genesis 46:8)

Reuben lost the birthright because of sexual misconduct:

21 Then Israel journeyed and pitched his tent beyond the tower of Eder. 22 And it happened, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine; and Israel heard about it. (Genesis 35:21-22)

3 "Reuben, you are my firstborn,
My might and the beginning of my strength,
The excellency of dignity and the excellency of power.
4 Unstable as water, you shall not excel,
Because you went up to your father's bed;
Then you defiled it —
He went up to my couch. (Genesis 49:3-4)

Further, notice that the Bible teaches that the birthright through Abraham, Isaac and then Jacob/Israel 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. Joseph probably was given it because of his conduct, as well as him physically saving the family during a time of famine.

Here are some observations by Peter Salemi:

From about 1690 to 1760 there was hostile rivalry between France and Britain over who would colonise and control North America. From 1690 to 1760 Great Britain and France fought each other many times in Eastern Canada. In 1759 Quebec surrendered to the British. In 1760 the British captured Montreal. By the treaty of Paris, France ceded North America to Great Britain in 1763. Because God gave the birthright to the sons of Joseph Great Britain rather than France became the pre-eminent Israelite colonial power.

The French revolution began in 1789 and lasted until 1799. Many people lost their lives during this blood thirsty revolution. : "Its been estimated that during the French Revolution some 1,240,000 perished" (French Revolution in Prophecy by Campbell, p.20). This was called the "reign of Terror" in France where where the clergy, aristocrats, the Royal family, and many others had their heads cut off, or drowned, all kind of horrors in that time that was called by some the "work of Extermination"  ...

After this time Napoleon took power, this Italian wanted to expand his territory that France lost to the British as we have seen above. At this time France lost against the British in 1793-1805 at sea. Nearly all the French colonies went into the hands of Britain. Napoleon want to destroy Britain and take over the colonies of the British Empire. This proved not to be true and spelled the end of the Empire of Napoleon who wanted expand his holy Roman Empire. France was defeated. It tried to "excel" as the prophecy said in Gen 49:4 but the Birthright's was Joseph's Ephraim and Manasseh, the two peoples that France lost its colonies to. Reuben was the "first of the colonial empires of Europe to acquire worldwide possessions" (Britain Foretold in the Bible Harold Hemenway p.13), just as his father Israel prophesied that Reuben was "the firstborn, my might and the beginning of my strength" (Gen 49:3). He tried to "excel" but "would not" because the "birthright was Joseph's" (1 Chronicles 5:1). (David James Skelly with additions by Peter Salemi. ORIGIN OF FRANCE AND ITS PEOPLES. viewed 12/14/14)

It perhaps should be mentioned that some in Quebec are likely descended from Ephraim and some others from Reuben (see also Canada in Prophecy: What Does Bible Prophecy, Catholic Prophecy, and other Predictions Suggest About the Future of Canada?).

Here is some of what Dibar Apartian wrote:

The Decadence of France

Superior "in dignity... and in power" (according to the prophecy given in Genesis 49:3), France played, during a number of centuries, an integral role in the history of nations. Called the "queen of the world," it remains the heart of all social, intellectual, and artistic activities. Poets even named it "the pride of the civilized world"!

But things changed! With the loss of Louisiana that Napoleon Bonaparte ceded to the United States in 1803, France suddenly began to lose, and continues to lose, its past grandeur and glory!

Reuben lost his birthright!

"Since the commencement of the [nineteenth] century," states Elisee Reclus, "France has certainly been equaled by its rivals in Europe in works of thought and in the arts of peace, not to mention the bloody game of war. One could blame it then for wanting to keep for itself alone the name "great nation" which was given it in days of yore" (Nouvelle Geographie Universelle, Reclus, Vol. II, "France").

The Reason for its Decadence

Why this sudden change after the year 1803?

In the twenty-sixth chapter of Leviticus, we find the list of blessings and cursings that the Eternal set up for the children of Israel. If they faithfully obeyed the divine commandments, which included observance of the Sabbath, which is a "sign" between the Eternal and His people, they would then be abundantly blessed. On the other hand, the Eternal would punish them (and He did punish them!) seven times more — a prophetic time totaling 2520 years.

At several junctures, we have demonstrated in this work that the Israelites were not obedient to God's commandments. On the contrary, they turned away from Him to live in idolatry. It was for this reason that the Eternal caused them to be taken into captivity by the Assyrians in about 721 B.C. From that moment began the period of national banishment for all Israel; the duration would be, according to the prophecy, 2520 years. This national exile came to an end at the debut of the nineteenth century.

Grandeur and Decline

Although France conserved, in the course of its history, its superiority "in dignity and... in power," the other descendants of Israel lived, during these long prophetic years, in obscurity, in servitude and in poverty.

However, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, with the end of the period of national banishment, most of the Israelite nations, notably Great Britain (descended from Ephraim — chief of the tribes of Israel) and the United States of America (descended from Manasseh, the brother of Ephraim), began to enter into the possession of what had been promised to Abraham for the Israelites as a nation. Not only did they overtake France, but they surpassed it in almost every area. (See the work of Mr. Armstrong entitled: "The United States and the British Commonwealth in Prophecy.")

A curious fact: just as the tribes of Israel divided in the past and allied with their enemies to march against their own, today some of the Israelite nations — including France and Belgium — blindly ally themselves to the same nations who are going to conquer them and take them in captivity a second time! (Apartian D. The French-Speaking Peoples In Prophecy. 1961, 1967; translated into English by Carol Kalin in 1975)

When it comes to wealth and territory, Reuben (through Napoleon Bonaparte) sold off much territory in the form of the Louisiana Purchase to the then rising U.S.A. in 1803. This and other events under Napoleon Bonaparte (who was born of Italian parents) could have marked a transfer of birthright blessings to the descendents of Joseph at that time.

Reuben Left Palestine

The Bible shows that the ten tribes were captured and taken out of their land:

11 Then the king of Assyria carried Israel away captive to Assyria, and put them in Halah and by the Habor, the River of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes, 12 because they did not obey the voice of the Lord their God, but transgressed His covenant and all that Moses the servant of the Lord had commanded; and they would neither hear nor do them. (2 Kings 18:11-12)

The Jewish Encyclopedia of 1906 mentions:

After the assassination of Ishbosheth the Reubenites joined all the other tribes in proclaiming David king of all Israel. The number of the armed men sent jointly by the eastern two and one-half tribes to Hebron on this occasion is stated to have been 120,000 (ib. xii. 37). Afterward David appointed 2,700 Levites of the Hebron family as ecclesiastical and civil chiefs over the same tribes (ib. xxvi. 31-32). The prince of the Reubenites in his reign was Eliezer, son of Zikri (ib. xxvii. 16). Among David's mighty men was a Reubenite, Adina, son of Shiza, chief of thirty warriors (ib. xi. 42).

Later the Reubenites are mentioned only twice—in II Kings x. 33, where their country is said to have been ravaged by Hazael, King of Syria; and in I Chron. v. 6, 18-22, where it is recorded that they, like their neighbors, dwelt east of the Jordan till they were carried away into captivity by Tiglathpileser, their chief at that time being Beerah, son of Baal of the Joel family. (REUBEN, TRIBE OF: Jewish Encyclopedia of 1906.

Reuben left Palestine.

According to the first century A.D. Jewish historian Josephus, the ten tribes ended up on the other side of the Euphrates river:

...[W]herefore there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers (Flavius Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews, 11:5:2).

So, Josephus recognized that the ten tribes were still not part of Judea. He essentially seemed to believe that they were all part of and/or mixed with the Scythians. Some were, but others had already migrated by the time Josephus wrote this. Many of the Ephraimites and Reubenites were under Roman domination, as well as some of the Manassehites in the first century. But the fact is that during the time of Jesus, Josephus DID NOT believe that the 'ten lost tribes' were part of Judea of the Roman Empire.

What are the Origins of the French People?

Notice something from a Jewish source:


    Obadiah said that "Benjamin shall possess Gilead" (Obadiah 1;19). "THE TRIBES" by Yair Davidy explains how the Tribe of Benjamin is today to be found both amongst Jews and also amongst descendants of the Normans and Belgae. The Belgae gave their name to Belgium and today are represented by the Walloons of that country. Belgae also settled in southern Britain, in Wales, and in Ireland.
    Zechariah (10;10) foresaw that the tribe of Ephraim and other Israelite groups are destined to possess "The land of Gilead and Lebanon" meaning the areas of modern Syria and Lebanon. The land of Gilead had a southern and a northern section, perhaps Benjamin receives one, Ephraim the other or both settle the whole together or separate stages of future re-settlement are spoken of: The Prophet Ezekiel (chapter 48) describes the Land of Greater Israel (from the Nile to the Euphrates and perhaps beyond) being divided amongst all of the Tribes of Israel.


    "And the captivity of this host of the children of Israel  shall posses that of the Canaanites, even unto Zarephath; and the captivity of Jerusalem, which is in Sepharad, shall possess the cities of the south.

     "And saviours shall come up on mount Zion to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the LORD's" (Obadiah 1;20 21).

    The above translation is from the King James (KJ) version. The Hebrew original is capable of additional nuances of meaning.
    As explained above, Zarephath was the name of a township on the coast of Lebanon, "Zarephath which belongeth to Zidon" (1 Kings 17;9). "Zarephath" was also the name given in later Hebrew to France and its neighborhood. "Zarephath" is mentioned in the Book of Obadiah (1;20) in connection with the exile of the children of Israel:
    "The captivity of this host of the children of Israel shall possess that of the Canaanites unto Zarepath.."

According to a composite explanation based on Rabbinical Commentators the above verse may actually be understood to say:

    "This first exile [of the Lost Ten Tribes] who reach from the Land of Canaanites [i.e. Germany] to Zeraphath [France and Britain].."

 The Hebrew word ("Chail") translated in the KJ as "host" can also mean "first" and most Jewish Commentators seem to have understood the verse to refer to the first exile which was that of the Lost Ten Tribes. They also  tended to understand the place name "Zarephath" (in this case) as referring to France and its area or to France and England together and thus either expressly or by implication to link the Lost Ten Tribes with these western regions.
  Classical Jewish Traditional Commentators interpreted the Hebrew passage of the first part of the above excerpt as saying:
    "And this first exile of the children of Israel who are (positioned) from the Canaanites  to Zarephath..."*o

 The words of the traditional Jewish Rabbinical Commentators on this verse will now be quoted with a bare minimum of explanation. Suffice it to say that their opinions are based on substance and confirmed from other sources:

Rashi (Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac, 1040 1105, Champagne, France):

    "The first exile of the children of Israel who were exiled from the Ten Tribes to the land of Canaanites unto Zarephath...The exegetes say that Zarephath means the Kingdom called `France' in common language.."

i.e. Rashi says that the Lost Ten Tribes are in France! (Davidiy Y. Commentary on the book of Obadiah. accessed 11/05/19)

Dibar Apartian wrote a lot of details about the origins of the French people. Let's begin with the following:

The Reasons for the Uncertainty of History

The origins of the histories of the French-speaking countries, as those of all the nations of the world, represent an insoluble mystery for historians and ethnologists. They recognize frankly that the annals of ancient history are very obscure. "History doesn't know the origin of any people" remarked Lenormant (Ancient History of the Orient, p. 234) adding that the farther one attempts to delve into the past, the more obscure it becomes.

What then is the reason? Better than anyone, Paul, "the apostle to the Gentiles," can give us the answer in his epistle to the Romans, written under divine inspiration:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men, who hold the truth captive, because that which may be known of God is manifest to them; for God has showed it to them... they became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened," Romans 1:18-21.

Unlike the theorems of geometry and mathematics, history, to such an extent as mankind has exposed it, has given us no reliable summary, which has not been corrupted. Its knowledge is not only scanty, but also hypothetical. In the "Preface" of his work entitled Encyclopedia of World History, Mr. Langer recognizes this gap and confirms the fact that a number of historical facts are themselves contested, and so little corroborated, that they could never establish the basis of any definite testimony.

History, therefore, has no point of departure. It ignores that there is a source, or rather it rejects it firmly, as we are going to see.

Consequently, having no one definite source from which it can draw its pieces of information with the desired assurance, the historian tends to speak of the "possible" and of the "probable." But this possible and this probable, by the admission of Jubinville "holds a larger and larger place which is increased proportionally as the number of centuries which separate us from the events," The First Inhabitants of Europe, p. VIII.

We live in an age in which man has no fear of considering "obsolete" every work or treatise, or any knowledge that is not the product of the present generation — including the Bible! Thus, history is doubly vulnerable, for not only does it miss necessary clues, but as well, since it refuses to consider the Biblical date of the creation of man, its chronology becomes almost entirely a myth!

History, as historians tell it, depends exclusively on scientific knowledge acquired by men through the ages. To cite an example, bibliography, paleography, archaeology, chronology, paleontology, etc., are some sciences related to history; because their principles change with the course of civilization, history, in turn, remains subject to revision, if not always unexpected, at least sometimes radical.

What is more, history is given an essentially inductive or logical quality, seeing that it goes back through time instead of building up on data from earlier eras, and that it must reconstruct situations based on how things later became, instead of the opposite. By assuming these backward roles, the inductive and conjectural part of history ends up becoming the most important part, and one is thus lost in false reasonings and relying on traditions of men, and "after the rudiments of the world," Colossians 2:8.

Another cause of the inaccuracy of history is surely due to the sometimes overly enthusiastic patriotism of historians, whose accounts are often presented with prejudice and partiality:

"Is there an impartial history? And first, what is history?" writes Anatole France. "How can a historian judge whether a fact is important or not? He judges it arbitrarily," The Garden of Epicure, p. 139.

No one can dispute this fact. Each nation takes pride in its past and its individual contribution to civilization. If it has some pretension to age, it tries to prove that its history dates from a time well before the actual appearance of man! So it is that ancient nations such as Egypt and Persia, whose historical chronologies have inspired those of other nations, have an extravagant system to calculate dates, even though they offer not one historic certainty!

The Bible Challenges History

Where, then, is a compass which can guide historians and scholars in their research — the official and infallible source from which they could draw their understanding, a source from which it would be possible to verify the authenticity of their discoveries?

The answer is obvious: The Bible! Unfortunately, it is discarded by nearly every modern expert in the matter of history, under the pretext that its accounts are not only vague and contradictory, but that they belong in the realm of fantasy! Nevertheless, these same experts consider in complete faith the ancient "legends," notably of the Greek world, passed on to us! This paradox is inexplicable!

Thus the scientific world rejects the authority of the Bible. It takes offense even at the idea that the Bible could have been drafted under divine inspiration. This truth affronts and insults it! At most, some consider the New Testament the sacred book of Christians, but the Old Testament — after all — couldn't be but a beautiful anthology of legends or Jewish history. "The Bible is a literary work, and not a dogma," says philosopher George Santayana (Dialogues in Limbo).

If the Old Testament is nothing but a simple history of the Jewish people, don't you think its "authors" would have been able to at least give proof of a little more chauvinism in regard to their country, reporting things a little more advantageously and a little stretched?

The fact that archaeological discoveries regularly confirm the Biblical accounts has no effect at all on the preconceived ideas of the experts. Totally rejecting divine authority, man seeks in any way to discredit the Bible; the historic events that it accounts are seen only in the light of the dogmas of history. In case of contradiction or controversy, the experts always put their trust in history — never in the Bible!

Would it then be reckless to say that historians, in general, do not believe in God? How could they believe in Him if they reject the truth of the events described in the Bible! The Bible is infallible; it is the WORD OF GOD, but men don't understand it. Notice in this regard the response of the illustrious Tallyrand, when asked if he believed in the Bible. He declared that he had two invincible reasons to believe: "First, because I am Bishop of Autun; and next, because I listen to absolutely nothing!" (Varietes, Dec. 20, 1934).

This answer is not only comic: it is especially tragic! For ourselves, we can declare that we also have two invincible reasons to believe in the Bible; but ours are much different than Tallyrand's. First, we are not under the yoke of human doctrines and traditions; next, by the grace of the Spirit of God, we can understand the Bible!

Chapter 1:

The History of the Israelites

History knows, in general, that the Gauls are the true ancestors of the French; but there again, there are very divided opinions on the origin of this Celtic people.

Who then were the Gauls? Where did they come from? What is their true origin? What were their characteristic traits, their customs, their culture, and their religion?

This is precisely their history that we are going to study in the light of the Bible. In doing this, we must "prove all things," in order to prove and reclaim the truth, according to divine instructions, I Thessalonians 5:21. Indeed, all scripture was given by divine inspiration, "to teach, to convince, to correct, and to instruct," II Timothy 3:16.

We must become as the Bereans, who, having received the Word, eagerly "searched the scriptures daily, to prove whether these things be so," Acts 17:10, 11. But once the truth is revealed to you, you must accept it honestly and without prejudice, in order to replace the false doctrines you have believed before.

The history of the Gauls, in the eyes of the world, begins around the seventh century B.C. — but the fact is the Gauls existed long before this era! If their identity remains lost in history, it is because they carried before a different name: a Biblical Name.

As strange as it might seem, the history of the Gauls — this people who lived under the rulership of the Druids — begins at the same time as the history of Israel, and that, so the Bible tells us with great precision, begins with Abraham. ...

The term "Jew" is only a nickname given to the people of Judah. It refers only to that nation, the house of Judah — never to the house of Israel. In fact, the very first time the Bible speaks of the "Jews," they were in a state of war against Israel! II Kings 16:5-6. Under King Rehoboam, of the dynasty of David, the house of Judah (including the tribe of Benjamin), struggled against the ten other tribes, composed of, under Jeroboam, a separate, different nation! This alone is enough to show that the Jews and the Israelites are two distinct, separate nations. But people don't know this because they don't study the Bible.

In our time, some places inhabited by the ten tribes of Israel, are not Jewish! So we must note that each time the Bible prophesies on "Israel" or "the house of Israel" or even on "Samaria" it does not refer to the Jews!

However, speaking of the entire twelve tribes, the terms "Israel" and "children of Israel" include the Jews, but they never refer exclusively to the Jews. Certainly the Jews are Israelites, but not all Israelites are Jews. We can better understand this question by saying that Parisians, generally, are Frenchmen, but not all Frenchmen are Parisians.

Israel in Captivity

The second time the Bible makes mention of the name "Jew," the house of Israel is already in captivity, under the Assyrian empire, "distant from the face of the Eternal." Merely glance at a map of Palestine to understand the reasons for an Assyrian invasion, who carried out the long and miserable captivity of the children of Israel. Their country was a roadway to Egypt, whose riches were greatly envied by other nations.

The success of the Assyrian invasion was due not only to the power of their army, but especially to the sad decadence of the Israelites who, "distant from the face of the Eternal," were weakened by corruption of their morals and internal struggles.

It will be interesting to briefly examine the history of this decadence, which began under the reign of Solomon, when the two nations, Israel and Judah, were still united and a single power.

Grandeur and Decadence under Solomon

About the year 1000 B.C., Solomon was at the apex of his glory! He dominated all the countries from the Euphrates to the frontiers of Egypt (I Kings 4:21; II Chronicles 9:26). Becoming rich and powerful, he was allied by marriage with the Egyptian Pharaoh (I Kings 3:1) and maintained excellent relations with Hiram, the Phoenician king of Tyre and Sidon (I Kings 5:1, 12). Under the reign of Solomon the famous temple of Jerusalem was built.

At this time the riches and prosperity of the country was such that silver had become "as common in Jerusalem as stones" (I Kings 10:27).

However, what interests us in the present work, is the alliance Solomon made with the Phoenicians who helped him not only to build the temple, but also in foreign trade. Solomon, rich and powerful, furnished the ships and ports, while his ally, Hiram, put at the disposition of the King of Israel his famous Phoenician sailors, who traveled the entire world, returning every three years "bringing gold, and silver, ivory, monkeys, and peacocks," I Kings 10:22; II Chronicles 9:21. Peacocks originated in India; thus it was there the Phoenicians went. At that time, such a voyage at sea, round trip, took about three years.

According to the Bible, the center of commerce by transit was Tarsis. The "Petit Larouse" says the Phoenicians founded numerous branches in North Africa, "notable at Carthage, which must have eclipsed them later. In Spain, they established themselves strongly, founding cities, such as Cadiz, Malaga, Adra, and Elche. They exploited the rich mines of copper of Tharsis, in Andalousie" (New Little Larousse, 1960 Edition, article: "Phoenicia").

Another famous port they founded is actually known under the name of Marseille (France). Ruined after the downfall of Phoenician power, this city was rebuilt, about the year 600 B.C., by a colony of Phoenicians.

What historians don't know (or was it merely rejected by them?), is that this great exploitation of enterprise by the Phoenicians was done in direct alliance with Solomon and Israel. As we will see further on, the Israelites and the Phoenicians, by royal marriages or political claims, maintained good relations on both sides during several centuries.

Even under Herod, king of Judea, the Phoenicians desired peace, because their country still took their subsistence from that of the Jews, Acts 12:20. In the end, when Israel went out of captivity, the route of retreat was totally cut off to the south by the forces of the powerful Babylonian Empire. So it is perfectly natural that the Israelites, at the end of their captivity, turned towards the North, to be near their ancient colonies.

Israel Divides

In spite of his brilliant successes and the immense riches that he had accumulated, Solomon imposed a rude servitude on the people. At his death, the Israelites demanded of Rehoboam, his son, that he alleviate the heavy judgment imposed by his father. Rehoboam refused them, and the twelve tribes dispersed in two groups. Ten of them united to form a distinct kingdom, I Kings 12:19, under Jeroboam, one of Solomon's servants, while the two others (the tribes of Judah and Benjamin) remained faithful to King Rehoboam.

Israel Turns to Idolatry

Jeroboam, striving to keep the two kingdoms separate, followed the pagan example of the Egyptians, and instituted the cult of the calves. This pagan holiday would replace the Holy Days of the Eternal. "Jeroboam established sacrifices for the high places, for the groves, and for the idols he had made," II Chronicles 11:15.

The Levites who were found throughout Israel quit their dwellings to join Judah, II Chronicles 11:13-14. Israel had turned to paganism.

There were, in the tribes of the North, nineteen kings who then succeeded to the throne; each of them committed himself to the worship of the golden calves! Some also worshipped Baal, the god of the sun. Israel had become pagan. So for this reason the ten tribes, once liberated, were easily lost in the world as they already followed its ways, that is, its pagan customs! It is thus that Israel lost the sign that identified it as the people of the Eternal (Ezekiel 20:12).

The dynasty of Jeroboam was set up with his son and followed by a series of evil kings, whose sole preoccupations seemed to be idolatry and war — notably the war against Judah, and against Syria. (Apartian D. The French-Speaking Peoples In Prophecy. 1961, 1967; translated into English by Carol Kalin in 1975)

Let me interject here, when one views such French buildings as Notre Dame, one can see that idolatry is part of the culture of the French. I would also add that France has a lot pilgrimage sites for 'incorruptibles,' basically Catholic saints who are venerated whose bodies did not deteriorate as normal after death.

As far as Notre Dame itself, the name means "Our Lady" and is reference to the non-biblical version of "Mary" that many Catholics improperly worship/venerate.

Here are more of Dibar Apartian's writings

Chapter 2:

Captivity and Liberation

The Israelites, at the time of the deportation, which took place in several stages, were successively taken into captivity, as in Assyria, or in other foreign nations, notably in the cities of the Medes. The deportation to foreign places was customary in Assyrian politics, because it permitted easier destruction of all spirit of nationalism in their prisoners, reducing them totally to slavery.

A Deportation in Several Stages

The first stage of this deportation en masse was carried out by Tiglath-Pileser (II Kings 15:29), and took place due east of the Jordan; this territory was occupied by the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh. The captives were taken "to Halah, to Habor, Hara, and the river Gozan" (I Chronicles 5:26).

This deportation took place about 740 B.C. It affected the majority of the population of the house of Israel. Only Samaria was exempt, though its inhabitants, under King Hoshea, later became the slaves of the Assyrians.

... when Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, discovered the conspiracy of Hoshea, he went against Syria and besieged it. During the siege which lasted three long years, Shalmaneser died, and his successor achieved the conquest and took the rest of Israel in captivity. The new captives were sent to Assyria, to be deported to "Halah and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes" II Kings 17:6, 18:11.

The great Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, confirms this fact (Antiquities IX, XIV, 1), whereas Tobit, author of the book of the apocalypse of the same name, states precisely that as a member of the tribe of Naphtali, he himself was taken into captivity by the king of Assyria (Apocrypha, "Tobit," 1:3, 10).

By combining these diverse testimonies, we establish that the house of Israel, known under the name of the "house of Omri" or "Bit Khumri," by the Assyrians, was deported to the north, in regions which are actually part of the Persian or Iranian territory. These diverse places of deportation, as we can easily prove, are not at all far from the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea.

The Assyrians always strove to deport their prisoners as far as possible from their birthplaces. This method achieved a double objective: first, it rendered impossible any means of communication between the deported prisoners and their native country; secondly, it prevented them from regaining their country in case of escape. ...

 The Jewish writer Esdras declares in his book of the Apocrypha that the ten tribes of Israel, after their liberation, emigrated to other countries, rather than returning to their own land (II Esdras 13:40-46). It is evident that the Bible agrees with this categorically.

Where Did They Go?

So in what direction did these tribes go after their liberation? Where are they located now? In which countries did they settle, and who are their modern descendants? This is what we will examine in the following chapters. Whatever their present-day location, it is evident that these tribes have different names and that they are unrecognizable to the world, since they are integrated with the inhabitants of the foreign countries in which they settled.

The Bible clearly indicates the direction the tribes took in their migration. Speaking of the "time of the end," that is to say, the era in which we live, the prophet Jeremiah declares that the Eternal will restore Israel, "from the countries to the north and the coasts of the earth, and reassemble them from the ends of the earth!" Jeremiah 31:8.

If Jeremiah indicates the tribes had directed themselves toward the north, the prophet Isaiah states that they would be found "in the last days" in the countries situated to the northwest of Palestine (Isaiah 49:12).

According to these divine declarations, it is certain then that in the last days, that is to say, in the present era, the tribes of Israel would be found to the northwest of Jerusalem; we say "of Jerusalem" because the Bible always establishes directions from the location of that city. Let's consult then an atlas in order to determine which are the "remote" countries to the northwest of Jerusalem. If we look in the direction of the markings, where do we see they point? To Western Europe! Thus, according to divine prophecy, the ten tribes of Israel must live, in our days, in Western Europe. God says this is so. "Let God be true, and every man a liar" (Romans 3:4).

Chapter 3:

The Ancient Inhabitants of France

Before the arrival of the Gauls in France, the country was populated with other races which history knows principally under two general names: the Ligurians and the Iberians. ...

 History tells us that the heart of Iberian civilization was Andalusia, a province in southern Spain. The Iberians were good sailors. Their arts and industries, as shown by the excavation enterprises since the beginning of the present century, indicates a striking similarity to those of the Phoenicians and the Greeks.

The influence of the Iberians in Gaul, and the role they played there, was always minimal and negligible.

"Of all the countries occupied by the Iberian race, Spain is the one in which this race maintained predominance in number and language for the longest period of time, thus autonomy," declares Jubainville.

To conclude, we emphasize the fact that neither the Ligurians nor the Iberians, who were enemies, were the ancestors, properly speaking, of the French. As both Diodorus of Sicily and Strabo affirm, the Ligurians and the Celtics (who lived around the Gauls) are a very different race.

The Gauls — the people of the Celtic race — are those who actually are the ancestors of the French nation, since the Celts and the Israelites are the same people!

Chapter 4:

The Cimbri and the Cimmerians

From a historic viewpoint, one of the clues that one has in finding the route of migration of the Israelites toward Western Europe, is the name "Bit Khumri" by which they were known to the Assyrians. Many Assyrian inscriptions describe, indeed, the house of Israel as "the house of Omri" or "Bit Khumri."

Omri also can be pronounced Ghomri, says the historian Pinches (The Old Testament in the Light of Historical Records, p. 339).

The Israelites (called "Bit Khumri") didn't all stay under the yoke of their conquerors during the entire duration of their captivity.

The Assyrian Empire, reigning over several nations, was incapable of maintaining a rigid control over all its vassals. In the course of years of captivity, revolts ensued, and detached groups successively evaded to the north and the northwest.

Some Unknown People Arrive in Europe

During the time Sargon (who took Israel captive) was on the throne (721-704 B.C.), no power could keep him in check, since no constituted and organized power still existed as a nation (Ancient History of the Orient, Lenormant, Vol. 4, Chap. 6, p. 235).

The greatest part of Asia Minor, according to Lenormant, was thus occupied by Hellenistic tribes which were mingled with the people of the Hittite race. At this time, Rome was only thirty years old (founded in 753 B.C.); it was neither powerful nor well-known.

In less than 100 years, that is to say about 609 B.C., the Assyrian Empire crumbled. Immediately afterwards, in Europe, a new nomadic nation, immigrants never known before, appear suddenly. Greek historians, who tell of these unexpected migrations, admit they know nothing of the origin of these immigrants. At most they tell us these peoples came from the areas around the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea.

Some historians recognize that these peoples, in their entirety, were composed of organized tribes, these saying that they were delivered from the yoke of the Assyrians!

In an irony of sorts (or is it really?) the Assyrians endured to later escape from Babylon, to go to refuge in Western Europe, becoming thus the neighbors of their former captives! Because of this Assyrian immigration — principally Germanic, since the Assyrians are the ancestors of the Germans — an influx mixed in small part with Israelites, history considers their predecessors (the Israelites who, taken into captivity previously by the Assyrians, came before them to Western Europe), people of the Germanic race.

But this hypothesis is in error.

While the Assyrians used the name "Bit Khumri" for the whole of the Israelite tribes, the Greeks knew them under the name "Cymry" or "Kimmeroi," from which proceeded the terms "Cimbri" and "Cimmerians."

These people were not all the Germanic race. As a group, it was the Israelites who, in separate groups, came to Europe at different times. It is very interesting to note what Thierry says on the subject:

"The earliest writer who makes mention of these Kimbri is Philemon, contemporary of Aristotle: according to him, they called their ocean Mori-Maruss, or the Dead Sea, up to the promontory of Rubeas..." (Histoire des Gaulois, Thierry, Intro., p. 56).

The Cimbri and the Cimmerians came from the area of the Dead Sea, history tells us. Naturally, since that was the country of their fathers.

The Scythians

A number of works have been written on the migration of the Cimmerians in Western Europe. History finds them reading first in "Scythia," to the north of the Black Sea, inhabited today by the Russians.

"The Cimmeriis are the most ancient inhabitants of Scythia.... Some of them were nomads while others were farmers" (Histoire des Gaulois, Thierry, Intro., p. 56). The Encyclopaedia Britannica article on "Scythis" adds that the Cimbri, or Cimmerians, were driven far from this country by a group of invaders coming from the North of Asia, about the seventh century. These invaders called themselves "Scythians."

History tells us that a little earlier around the same time, a part of the Scythians marched against the regions of the north whose people actually were connected with Persia. That part called themselves "Saka" or "Sacae"; it was later known under the general name "Scythia."

Some 100 years later, Darius I inscribed on the famous "Behistun Stone" that the Cimmerians were made to submit to him along with 22 peoples. This "Behistun Stone" bears an inscription in three languages — Persian, Susa (Elamite), and Babylonian — in which Darius named the provinces made to submit under his authority.

The long list was written on three pillars, each of which gave the name of the country, or of the province, with their phonetic pronunciation in the three languages. Here is how the name of Sythia appeared there (The Inscriptions of Darius the Great at Behistun):

In Persian In Susa In Babylonian
(Phonetically: SAKA) (Phonetically: SAKA) (Phonetically: GIMIRI)

We can then prove that the terms "Saka" in Persian (Rawlinson spells it "Sacae" (Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society," p. 27), and "Gimiri" in Babylonian, are synonyms.

Also note that Darius associates the Cimmerians with "Sacae," and even identifies them as the same people.

Who were, rightfully, these "Sacae" that history has ended up grouping under the general name "Scythians"? Who were their ancestors? Were they of the same race to which Darius and others associated them?

The "Sacae," as we have just seen, made up a part of a group of "peoples" called Scythians; among this mixture of peoples, the "Sacae" were of Israelite origin. In other words, of all the peoples called "Scythians," the Sacae comprised a separate group (The History of Herodotus, Book IV, Essay I, footnote 1) who later settled in Western Europe, as history indicates (Proceedings of the Royal Asiatic Society, p. 21).

It is indeed established that among the peoples known under the general name "Scythians," the Sacae were made up of a group of Cimbri or Cimmerians, that is to say, of people of Israelite tribes in migration toward Western Europe, after their liberation.

Always, we should repeat that the term "Scythia," like the term "Kimri," included several different peoples, for in ancient times the inhabitants of a region often adopted the name of that area without necessarily being citizens of it or being under the jurisdiction of the government.

This name "Scythians" ended up becoming rather, a geographic term, describing a specific place, and, after the departure of the first "Cimbri" or Sacae," many other peoples, traversing that area adopted the name in turn.

Among all the peoples known under the general name "Scythians," the Sacae were the descendants of the children of Israel! Not only is it possible for us to notice a parallel by comparing the traditions of the two peoples, but history even recognizes that the majority of the peoples of the British Isles, particularly the "Scots" and the "Saxons," are the descendants of the Scythians (New English Dictionary, Article: "Scots"), thus of the Israelites!

Among the different historical affirmations, the one made by Diodorus of Sicily is perhaps the most remarkable and the most interesting. This Greek historian clearly indicates to us that certain tribes of the Scythians came both from Assyria and from the areas inhabited by the Medes (Diodorus of Sicily, Book II, chap. 3)!

The Saxons

What then is the degree of parentage between the Saxons and the Scythians?

As we have already indicated, the "Sacae," upon arriving in Western Europe, notably in the British Isles, took the general name "Saxons."

"Among the diverse nations known under the name Scythians, the Sakai or Sacae represent the ancestors of the Saxons.... This fact can be affirmed without violating the chances of probability. Sakal-Suna, or "Sons of Sakal" is the same thing as "Saxons" (The History of the Anglo-Saxons, Turner, Vol. 2, Chap. 1, p. 81, emphasis ours).

In all likelihood, the exact derivation of the name "Sacae" — or "Sakae" — is from Isaac, the father of Israel. The names "Sacae" or "Isaac" have the same etymological root. Because of the fact that the vowels were mute in the ancient Hebrew language, the two names have the same pronunciation.

"Saxons" — or "Sacal-Suna" — represent then a variation of "Isaac's sons." This well demonstrates the truth, for the Israelites were the sons of Isaac, by Jacob!

The final destination of the Cimbri (or Cimmerians) is one of the most well-established historical facts, and is not a matter of the least controversy. History assures us that the Cimbri migrated to the west, and established themselves in Wales, Great Britain, and France.

At the close of the fourth century B.C., "a new population spread in Gaul; it didn't arrive in mass, but in the course of a series of invasions; the two principal ones took place at the beginning and at the end of the period.... The invaders called themselves Kymrians, or Cimmerians, where the Romans took the term Cimbri to designate the Cimmerians (France, Witt, pp. 16-17, emphasis ours).

Although the Greeks and the Romans, before Julius Caesar, had only vague notions about the origins of the peoples to the north of their countries, their own historians are unanimous in admitting that the Cimmerians figured among these peoples. Moreover, Thierry states this point in a rather remarkable way. He writes indeed:

"Two historical witnesses which date from the time of Alexander the Great attest to the existence of a people called Kimmerii or Kimbri on the coast of the North Sea, in the peninsula which will later carry the name Jutland (Denmark). And besides, the scholars recognize the identity of the words Kimmerii and Kimbri, that both belong to a different genus than the Greek and Latin languages" (Histoire des Gaulois, Thierry, p. 56).

The famous French historian remarked that Strabo and other Greeks, as is said by Posidonius, call Kimmerii those who would be later known under the name "Kimbri." Plutarch, in turn, adds that this change is not at all surprising, while Diodorus of Sicily attributes it to "time" and adopts the opinion of Posidonius, which, according to Thierry, differs generally among the learned Greeks.

History has then incontestably established that the Cimmerians, Cimbri or Kymry are the representatives of one and the same people who invaded France in the course of successive invasions. Notice these invasions began 100 years after the deportation of the tribes of Israel by the Assyrians.

In our time, a part of these Cimbri inhabit France; this fact is natural since the French are their descendants!

Chapter 5:

The Celts and the Gauls

The origin of the Celts and the Gauls, according to the most celebrated historians, still constitutes one of the most mysterious enigmas of all history.

Dottin frankly avows that history knows nothing precise about the date of "the arrival of the Celts in Gaul" (Les Anciens peuples de l'Europe, Dottin, p. 209) ...

The Key to the Mystery

Once more, only the Bible contains the key to the mystery. The enigma ceases to be insoluble if one examines it in the light of the historical information found in the Bible.

The ancients used the name "Celts," or "Celtica," without much discrimination, in that which concerns language and race, to designate the inhabitants of the countries situated in the northwest of Europe. This term, in the history of these peoples, was then geographic rather than ethnic (France, Witt, p. 16).

There is one of the reasons why history finds itself in the dark. What is more, it will never come to understand the truth about the Celts as long as historians disdain the facts furnished by the Bible.

It wasn't until after the Roman occupation that the term "Celt," or "Gaul," was reserved for the inhabitants of Gaul. Thus, if the name of these peoples changed following the Roman occupation, it goes without saying that neither their race nor their characteristics were changed by it.

The testimony of Thierry, associating the Cimbri with the Celts, is remarkable:

"It is the last of these landmarks which links the Kimmerii of the Black Sea to the Cimbri of Jutland, to the Belgians of Gaul, to the Bretons of Albion, and we go on... to recognize that in this vast people remained the nucleus of the second of the Gaulic races, and that its name, so ancient, so renowned, so well-known, was none other than the very name of this race" (Histoire des Gaulois, Thierry, p. 70, Introduction).

Generally, historians agree in recognition of the traits the two peoples have in common, even though each seems to express more or less divergent points of view on the details. Hubert claims that the "Gauls gave themselves the name Kymris" ("Les Celtes," Hubert, p. 31), whereas, according to Flavius Josephus, it was Gomer, son of Japheth, grandson of Noah, who was the father of the Cimmerians, "that is to say of the Cimbri and Celtics, from which one concludes that a good part of humanity itself issued from the Celtic world," (Les Gaulois, Pernoud, pp. 31-32).

Among the historians who claim to accept both the truth and the historical chronology of the Bible, the common mistake lies in their obstinacy, which is sometimes pathetic, to be always willing to research and trace the origin of people by means of mere resemblance, or by the similarity of their names with Biblical names!

Guided by this reasoning, which becomes unbearable if it is not collaborated with other factors, most scholars suppose that the Cimmerians must have been the descendants of Gomer, for the two names show a striking resemblance. To draw such premature conclusions on such incomplete facts is inexcusable.

To a certain degree, the Cimmerians were included in the descendants of Gomer, as the Scythians were included in the descendants of the house of Israel (by the tribe of "Sacae"). It is always altogether erroneous to make a generalization.

Some descendants of Gomer joined themselves to the Cimmerians, since the Bible indicates that Israel lived among the descendants of Gomer! The prophet Hosea had received the divine order to take to himself a "wife" who was a prostitute, to symbolize the relationship and adulterous state of Israel toward the Eternal. The prostitute that the prophet married personified Israel, but was named Gomer, Hosea 1:2-3.

However, we must repeat that the Cimmerians of Europe, as a whole, are not the descendants of Gomer. ...

The Neighbors of the Gauls

If our efforts in this work tend rather to determining the origin of the French, to neglect the racial affinity between them and their neighbors would be to lose sight of the object we have followed, since most of the inhabitants of northwest Europe are of the Celtic Race, and thus are part of the tribes of Israel, "in dispersion."

Indeed, the Belgians, the people of Holland, the Swiss, and the Scandinavians belong to the same race as the French, the English, the Americans, and the Canadians, since, as a whole, these people are descendants of the Celts. They all have a common ancestor: Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel!

As for the Belgians and the Swiss, inhabitants of countries which in part speak the French language, history has had no difficulty establishing their direct parentage with the Celts (Histoire des Gaulois, Thierry, p. 36). This same parentage extends to the people of the British Isles, as Thierry affirms:

"There was among the ancients an opinion, or better said, a fact accepted as nearly incontestable, that the inhabitants of the British Archipelago and Gaul were peoples originating from the same race" (Histoire des Gaulois, Thierry, p. 8).

Hipparque attests, in turn, that the inhabitants of the British Isles and Eire (known today as Ireland) were Celtic.

The Celtic League

As we are about to see, the Celts formed a league. For centuries, before the Roman conquest, this league was so powerful that even Alexander the Great (about 330 B.C.), carried away by his ambition to conquer the world, did not dare challenge it. Instead of entering into a war with it, he chose the method of conferring with their ambassadors, in order to sign a treaty of peace between the two powers (Legends of the Celtic Race, p. 23).

As it always is, by the time of the Roman conquest (58-51 B.C.), the power of the Celts had greatly diminished because of internal corruption, rather social than political. The Celts could only bow before and yield to the attacks of Caesar. They had lost their power.

This internal corruption is moreover recognized by historians. At the apex of their glory, the fifth century B.C., the Celts, according to Hellenicus of Lebos, still practiced "justice and integrity." A century later, the customs were already confounded with those of the Greeks. And, at the time of Plato, "their great attributes were nothing but drinking and fighting" (Legends of the Celtic Race, p. 17). Caton himself says the Gauls had but two passions: fighting and talking! (The Origins, Brentano, p. 53).

The Celtic League extended to Britain, since Caesar found in Britain the same religion as in Gaul and "also a general resemblance in the mores and social conditions," (Histoire des Gaulois, Thierry, p. 81). Tacitus, a Roman historian, had no doubt about this similarity; he even declares that it is evident even in the idioms of the language.

We can thus conclude that history has sufficient proofs, both to establish the racial affinity between the peoples who lived in Gaul and the British Isles, and to recognize the direct parentage of these peoples, and their common families which were established previously — before the migration of the Celts.

In his work on the history of France, Thierry concludes the subject by stating that the British Isles were populated by the Gaulic family, and that there, as in Gaul, this family found itself split in two branches, the one indigenous, that is to say, established from time immemorial, the other transplanted from Gaul to Britain, during historic times (Histoire des Gaulois, Thierry, Conclusion).

As we just seen, most of these "natives" spoken of by Thierry were descended from Israelite colonies which arrived previously to settle permanently. The migration of these colonies had taken pace in the time of Solomon, who had allied himself with the Phoenicians.

Chapter 6:

The Origin of Their Name

The complexity of the science of etymology is a well-known fact. Once it becomes a part of a language, a word evolves both in meaning and form; sometimes it even loses its original meaning. This is often the case with proper names.

The name the ancient inhabitants of the country gave themselves, or under which they were known by their contemporaries, is still one of the mysteries of the history of France. Even having recognized somewhat different pronunciations, such as "Celta," "Galli," "Galatia," "Walah," or "Gaul," which are their common names, as we shall see these are actually all derived from only one root.

Biblical Implications

In studying the Israelite origin of the Celtic peoples, one of the first questions which comes to mind is of the name which they carried through the centuries. One even wonders if the name under which they were known was of a historic or generic nature. Even though the Israelites lost their identity, their language, and, later, their nationality, their name seems to have kept the two natures.

Moses, according to the instructions of the Eternal, gave to the Reubenites and Gadites "from Areor, which is by the river Arnon, and half mount Gilead," Deuteronomy 3:12, 16, while the tribe of Manasseh received the rest of Gilead.

In the book of Chronicles (I Chronicles 5:3-10) we find, in part, the list of descendants of Reuben, of Gad, and of Manasseh, and we learn that part of the Reubenites lived "eastward... unto the entering in of the wilderness from the river Euphrates; because their cattle were multiplied in the land of Gilead."

Note already the striking similarity between the words "Galaad" (French for Gilead, the land in which part of the Reubenites lived), and Galli or Gaul (the land where they settled after their captivity!). Anyone who is learned in etymology would easily recognize the common base of these two terms.

Even evolving through the centuries, this name was preserved, as it is shown on Biblical atlases. In the time of Jesus, the regions to the north of Trans-Jordan (Gilead), were still called "Gaulonitis." Even today the Arabs call this land "Jaulan."

Historical Facts

But then how does one explain the fact that the terms "Celtica," "Galli," "Galatia," or again "Gaul," had not been given to the inhabitants of Gaul until after their arrival and establishment in the land?

Several answers are possible; first, as we said in the preceding chapter, the Gauls migrated into Europe under the name "Khumri" (or Cimbri or Cimmerians). The Encyclopaedia Britannica affirms that the ancients, speaking of the Gauls and the Cimbri, always associated them with the first Cimmerians (Article "Celt").

On the other hand, it is nearly certain that the Celts gave themselves that name, under different forms, before other nations called them that. Some historians recognize this fact:

"This name Celt, they gave themselves. Some also called them Galates. The Romans called them Galli," writes Brentano (The Origins).

Naturally, from the Latin words Gallus or Galli is derived the French "Gaulois" and the English "Gaul."

The Terms "Celtae," "Galatae," and "Galli"

The difference between these diverse terms appears especially in the linguistic domain. They all have a common origin; in the course of years, and because of different pronunciations the people gave them, these terms have taken forms more or less varied (Les Celtes, Hubert, p. 25).

In other words, it was a term mainly geographic. Explaining this point, Hubert tells us that in the third century A.D., a new name, that of "Galates," appeared for the first time in the works of the historian Jerome of Cardis, who recounts their invasion of Macedonia and Greece, before they settled in Asia Minor. But Hubert states with certainty "that the Gauls gave themselves the name Kymrois" (Les Celtes, Hubert, pp. 31-32).

All these different names then are synonyms, and apply to the same peoples interchangeably.

The Rapport Between the Different Terms

Some of the most esteemed French historians have already succeeded in establishing a connection between these diverse terms.

"The name given to the Celtic tribe of the Gauls, taken from the German form Walah, applies to the Valaques, or Wallons, or Gallois, to the Gauls themselves. The Germans derived Walah from a name that they mispronounced.... Also derived from Walah is the term Welsh," declares Brentano (The Origins, pp. 31-32).

In turn, Jubainville states that the adjective "walahise" became Welsch in the German tongue, which is of the same derivation as Walah, Wealh, or Gaul: "Gaul is the same as the old German Walah; Wales (French: Galles) is derived from Wealh" (The First Inhabitants of Europe, p. 420).

But why had these Celtic peoples taken a Germanic name? The answer certain linguists give us is quite surprising and harmonizes perfectly with the facts of history. Thus Pelloutier says "Waller, Galler, and Galli" signify stranger or wanderer; he adds that these people had given themselves this name because they had had to leave their country in a voluntary exile!

"It appears that the Celts... giving themselves the name Waller or Galler thus indicated that they had been chased from their ancient home, or that they had voluntarily condemned themselves to exile" writes James Grant (Thoughts on the Gael, p. 156).

This remarkable explanation precisely describes the condition of the nation of Israel, which, after having rejected the Eternal, lost the right to call themselves by the name that the Eternal had given them (Ezekiel 39:7).

But what is more interesting and remarkable still, is the significance even of the term "Scyth," another name the Israelites were known under at one time. (See the chapter on the "Scythians" and the "Sacae.") Indeed, it is curious to note that the word "Scyth," in the Celtic language, has exactly the same meaning as the Celtic word "Gael," that is to say "stranger" or "wanderer" (Collectanea de Rebus Hebernicia, Vol. II, Beauford, p. 225).

In light of this fact, it appears evident that the diverse names that the Israelites gave themselves, after their liberation from the Assyrian captivity, signify more or less the same thing, that is, a nation in exile, or foreign wanderers, strangers in a strange land!

Let us say, by way of conclusion, that in Hebrew (the ancient language of the Israelite tribes), the word for exile is "Golah," pronounced "Gau-lau"! The first Biblical mention of the Hebrew word is found in the Second Book of Kings (II Kings 15:29), where it is written that the inhabitants of the country of Naptali, thus of Gilead and of Galilee, were "taken away captive" ("Golah") into Assyria (Strong's Concordance, No. 1540).

Chapter 7:

The Language of the Celts

Of prime consideration, the question of the dissimilarity between the language of the Celts and that of the Israelites constitutes the greatest hurdle to the idea of the common racial parentage of the two peoples.

The Israelites, indeed, left Palestine speaking a Semitic language, and appeared in Europe using another language which philologists class as Indo-European.

But what does this term "Indo-European" of which one speaks with such erudition, mean? Is there really such a great dissimilarity between the languages classed in the group Indo-European and those called Semitic? ...

The Rapport Between the Semitic and European Languages

Indeed, there exists a definite rapport between Sanskrit and Hebrew, thus between the languages of the Indo-European family (which includes Celtic) and the Semitic family, but it is ancient Hebrew which is the mother language, since it is the oldest language known to man.

The philologists would have difficulty denying this fact. Prichard proves it irrefutably, and demonstrates the direct rapport between the two groups of languages, giving a long list of Semitic and Indo-European words, in which he compares their similarities.

The agreements between Hebrew and the languages called Indo-European are indeed more apparent than one might think. Prichard even adds that the Celtic language constitutes an "Intermediate Link" between the two families; this declaration is entirely correct (Eastern Origin of Celtic Nation, Prichard, p. 191).

Now let us see how the Israelites, on arriving in Europe, acquired a language called "Indo-European" whereas they spoke "a Semitic language" before the captivity.

The Language of the Tribes After the Liberation

During their long captivity, the tribes of Israel found themselves entirely dominated by the Assyrians, whose slaves they were.

Consequently, it is very natural that the influence of the conquerors, all this time, was considerable, not only in the area of social mores and religion, but also in that of language.

We must remember that Israel was taken into captivity "to Halah, and in Habor, by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes."

So what language was spoken in these regions which made up part of the country of the Medes? Ancient Persian, obviously! This language, which linguists class as Indo-European, is known to us by the inscriptions of the Achaemenidae kings, from Darius I (522-486 B.C.) to Artaxerxes Ochus (358-338 B.C.), when it was the official language. To be mentioned also, from a documentary standpoint, is that these inscriptions were usually trilingual: in old Persian, in Elamite, and in Babylonian.

As a result of their long captivity among peoples who spoke a language "classified" in the Indo-European group, the Israelites, in the end, forgot their maternal language. At the time of their migration to Europe, as Celtic peoples, they already spoke a dialect, or a dialect language that the world recognizes as being of the Indo-European family (The Celts of la Tene, Hubert, Pref.). ...

Philologists and historians, if they would accept the Biblical truth, would have no difficulty finding the common denominator between the Hebraic language, and that of the Celtic peoples who ended up establishing themselves in Western Europe!

Chapter 8:

Comparison of Characteristics

The patriarch Jacob, just before his death, called his sons together to reveal to them what would become of their descendants in the course of time.

This key prophecy is found in Genesis, chapter 49. It is renewed later, with some additions, by the mouth of Moses, Deuteronomy 33. Without this prophecy, it would be impossible for us to determine the exact identity of each tribe, after its dispersion.

More than this, the Bible reveals to us that each of the twelve tribes have inherited the principal traits of character of the son of Israel whose name it bears. Consequently, it is possible for us to establish the general character of Reuben, whose descendants later were known under the name Gauls!

The Character and Personality of Reuben

According to Biblical chronology, Reuben, the firstborn of Israel, was born about 1771 B.C. Of character ardent, impetuous, generous, and intelligent, this firstborn of Jacob played a predominant role in the history of the Israelites, as the Gauls played a role in the foreground of that of the Celtic peoples.

Reuben was also guilty with his brothers when the ruin of Joseph was plotted; but the plan he made to preserve the life of their young brother, proves the courage and the intelligence of Reuben. As a compromise, he succeeded in convincing his other brothers to throw Joseph into a dry cistern in the desert (Genesis 37:22), instead of shedding blood.

Reuben loved his own and others; this was easily shown when he volunteered to assume, according to the promise he made to his father (Genesis 42:37), the load of responsibility to restore Benjamin to him.

Of course, as all men, Reuben also had his weaknesses and faults. Above all, he lacked modesty, the Bible tells us! The impetuosity of his character and the lightness of his moral conduct caused him to lose his birthright (I Chronicles 5:1), because he "went and lay with Bilhah his father's concubine," Genesis 35:22.

In spite of the considerable consequences which resulted, the loss of the birthright did not forever involve the total retraction of blessings that Jacob had given to his oldest son: "Reuben, thou art my firstborn, my might, and the beginning of my strength, the excellency of dignity, and the excellency of power: Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel; because thou wentest up to thy father's bed; then defilest thou it: he went up to my couch," Genesis 49:3-4.

Thus the descendants of Reuben, conforming to this prophecy, lost their pre-eminence in the course of history, but kept even so — and have kept through the ages — their superiority in dignity and power.

As for their principal occupation, the sons of Reuben, all made excellent soldiers, and were good in agriculture. They had a considerable quantity of flocks (Numbers 32:1) and lived in a territory rich in pastures, east of the Jordan. Of independent and imaginative spirit (this trait of character was moreover quite pronounced among the Gauls!), they were hard workers, ready to fight for their rights, even when they were wrong!

Concerned about the comforts of life, the Reubenites possessed both a goodly amount of foresight and of vanity, as we see in the ensemble of the historic pieces of the Bible concerning the Reubenites. There again, we can't help but compare them to the French whose character, as says Jean de la Bruyers, "takes itself seriously" (Encyclopedie des Citations, No. 105).

All things considered, conforming to the predictions of Jacob, the Reubenites were, among the other tribes of Israel, a group superior in dignity and superior in power.

The Collective Personality and Character of the French

It is very difficult to make a judgment on the collective character of a large and an old nation, such as France.

Not less than other nations, the French did not keep the purity of their race. This resulted through incessant wars through the ages, or from the fact of invasions and crossbreedings with the natives and immigrants of different races. The French nation today is composed, as are all nations, of a society more or less cosmopolitan. Nevertheless, France retains a remarkable homogeneity.

In spite of the infiltration of diverse elements, greatly complicated and amalgamated, we state that France, from an ethnological point of view, is divided primarily in two distinct parts: those of the north and south — in other words, the Celts and the Greeks (La Gaule et les Gaulois, Zeller, p. 10).

The Celts, in coming from the east and the northeast, emigrated to the country around 600 B.C., and descended little by little toward the area of Marseille, where Greek colonies were established.

Later, most of the Greek colonies left the country under the name Gauls (a name given to the inhabitants of Gaul), to settle in Galatia, toward the year 280 B.C. It is for this reason that the Apostle Paul treated them as "gentiles" (that is to say non-Israelites) in the Epistle he addressed to them. Called "Galatians" or "Gauls," they were in reality of Greek origin, thus "gentiles."

These Galatians of Asia Minor, we repeat, were not Israelites. Even though certain of them, through intermarriage with the Gauls, had a little Israelite blood in their veins, the Galatians, as a whole, were a Greek people. This fact is not only confirmed in the Bible, but also by historical facts.

Paul was not the Apostle to the Israelites, but the "Apostle to the Gentiles" (Acts 14:27, 21:18-19; Romans 11:13; Galatians 2:2,7, 8; Ephesians 3:1, 8, etc.) and, in his Epistle to the Galatians, he addressed himself to them as "Gentiles" or as "Greeks" — non-Israelites. He speaks to them of his "conduct in Judaism" and of the traditions of his ancestors, and not of those of the Galatians (Galatians 1:14). In fact, the entire Epistle was written to assure them they had no need of circumcision to inherit the promises (Galatians 5:2, 6:12). If these Galatians had been Israelites, that instruction would not have been necessary.

It is known that the Galatians, spiritually speaking, belong to "the Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16). "If you are Christ's, you are then of the seed of Abraham, heirs according to the promise" (Galatians 3:29).

After this migration, the few Greeks who remained in the south of Gaul disappeared through the ages, due to multiple causes and to the fact of interbreeding with the Celts. Thus, France today still has its national homogeneity. The true ancestors of the French were the Gauls who are Israelites! It was because of this fact that Paul, "Apostle to the Gentiles," projected a voyage to Spain (Romans 15:24-28) — a non-Israelite country, thus "gentile" — avoiding France (Gaul). The conversion of the Israelites was committed to other Apostles, not to Paul.

We will try now to outline, very briefly, some of the collective traits of character of the French, such as the ethnologists and historians present to us, to establish a base of comparison between the collective character of the French and Reubenites which we have just examined.

However, instead of referring to the various works published on the subject, we will use only excerpts from the "Nouvelle Geography Universelle," the monumental work of Elisee Reclus, in which the celebrated French geographer summarizes marvelously even the principal ideas of diverse authors.

Before the rapid industrial development which characterizes our Twentieth Century, and which is totally changing the aspect of France, the majority of the population was composed of agriculturists and craftsmen. The French represent a hard-working and ingenious people.

"In spite of... the extreme difficulties," writes Elisee Reclus, "the peasant owner of his field has made the country one of the most productive on the earth" (Book II, Article: "France").

The famous geographer states that the French can express their sentiments and ideas better than other peoples:

"The French... have the special virtue of sociability... a natural sentiment of benevolence toward their fellow men, a spirit of equity guides them in their relations with all; they charm by their thoughtfulness.... They like to please by dress and manners.... They excel in the art of good conversation, and makes his point without discrediting others" (op. cit.).

These traits of character are specific to the Gauls and, before them, to the Israelites, especially to the descendants of Reuben, as we have seen at the first of this chapter.

As for the faults and weaknesses of the French, there again they find their echo in the Reubenites. In fact, the description of their character and personality could easily apply to Reuben.

Here is what Elisee Reclus says on the subject of the faults and weaknesses of the French:

"Able to be sociable 'par excellence,' he often tries to be 'everything to everyone' and thus loses his own value.... Talking easily with everyone, he risks being superficial in his judgments.... Respectful to sentiment in general... man of society or diversion, he doesn't always have the courage to remain himself" (op. cit.).

One must recognize, in these traits of character, the affable Reuben, intelligent and impetuous, who lost his birthright because of his lightness of sentiment and his love of gaity.

Of course, if the French culture has kept its superiority, the French must not attribute it to their own merits alone. Even if they have been "the arbiters of literature, and in certain domains of art, their superiority remains uncontested" (op. Cit.), the merit is not due to their own talents: they could not be otherwise, since divine prophecy, pronounced from the mouth of the patriarch Jacob, must come to pass. Reuben must retain his "superiority in dignity and power."

Chapter 9:

The Druids and the Dolmens

At the time Israel was taken into captivity by the Assyrians, its religion, as we have already indicated, was already completely different from that the Eternal had given through Moses; it even differed from what the Jews practiced at their return to Palestine.

The new and abominable religion adopted by Israel was made up of a curious mixture of pagan cults; it was greatly influenced by the diverse beliefs of nations round about, especially by those of the Phoenicians.

In the three following chapters, which will be devoted to the religion of the Celts and their society, we will attempt to prove, by numerous comparisons, that the Celts (the Gauls in particular) had a culture identical to that of ancient Israel. The customs and traditions of the two peoples are strikingly similar.

The Druids as Judges

Among the Celts, the religion depended principally on the Druids. One can even say it was the religion of the Druids. It was practiced not only in Great Britain, in Ireland, and in Gaul, but wherever the Celtic peoples had settled. The Druidic priesthood formed its head, with, according to the writings of the ancients, a power and prestige seldom equaled.

The Druids held an eminent place in Gaulic society. Mr. Pernoud declares: "The Druids... were priests and it was their priestly functions which assured their prestige. They offered sacrifices; Pliny recounts the sacrifice of white bullocks which had never known the yoke, as a tribute to the famous Cueillette Du Gui" (Les Gaulois, Pernoud, p. 154).

Merely on the basis of these few indications, one has already established an irrefutable base of comparison between the religion of the Celts and that of ancient Israel. Other writers, ancient as well as modern, collaborate with the statements of Pernoud, and give even more ample details. Zeller says:

"They [the Druids] passed as the most just of men and were the arbiters of public and private disputes.... What especially appertained to them was the judgment of crimes and murders" (La Gaule et les Gaulois, Zeller, pp. 37-38).

Notice that such judgments, in pagan nations, were always in the domain of civil government or of the chiefs of state, as it is still done in our day in almost the entire world.

There is only one people, ancient Israel, whose religion required that the priesthood be the arbiter of public and private disputes!

This striking parallel between the practice of the Druids and that of the Levitical priesthood is very significant, since the Eternal had given the following instructions to His people:

"If a cause relative to a murder, a dispute, a wound, appears too difficult to judge and causes a dispute in your gates... go to the sacrificers, the Levites... and they will make known the sentence," Deuteronomy 17:8-11. ...

Chapter 10:

The Oak and the Gods of the Druids

The oak, for diverse reasons, for instance its fertility and longevity, seems to have played an important part in the religion of the Druids. In the opinion of numerous historians, it even could be said to form an essential part of the religion of the Gauls.

Could there exist a similarity of customs between ancient Israel and the Celtic peoples concerning the oak?

Remember that Israel was punished for turning away from the commandments of the Eternal and for having followed the paganism of other nations. Consequently, the customs and traditions which the Israelites introduced into Europe, as Celtic immigrants, would not be part of their original religion, contained in the Pentateuch.

At the moment the Israelites were taken into captivity, their religion, as we have already indicated, had become a mixture of abominable beliefs, while some vestige of the original beliefs showed up under the outward appearance of paganism.
Let's see then if ancient Israel also practiced cults under the oak, as did the Gauls! As strange as it may seem, the response is affirmative; the Bible gives us ample witness.

It was thus that Joshua took a large stone and set it up under the oak "which was in the place consecrated to the Eternal," Joshua 24:26. It was under the oak of Ophra (Judges 6:11, 19-20), that Gideon received the message of the angel in order to deliver Israel; following that, he offered a sacrifice under the same oak.

It seems that it was the custom, among the Israelites, to sometimes bury the dead under a particular oak, Genesis 35:4, 8; I Chronicles 10:12.

Then again, oaks often marked the emplacement of alters. In this respect, one of the most severe divine accusations against this pagan worship was pronounced against Israel by the mouth of the prophet Ezekiel:

"Then shall ye know that I am the Lord, when their slain men shall be among their idols round about their alters, upon every high hill, in all the tops of the mountains, and under every green tree, and under every thick oak, the place where they did offer sweet savor to all their idols," Ezekiel 6:13. ...

Every student of the Bible knows the abominable role that Baal played in Israel. The Eternal God punished the Israelites because they turned to Baal; they offered him incense, made statues of molten metals, built him altars, and sacrificed their children before him.

"They thought to cause My people to forget My name... as their fathers have forgotten my name for Baal" declares the Eternal, Jeremiah 23:27.

This Baal, according to historians, was also the founder of Druidism (Celtic Researches, Davies, p. 190). In other words Baalism was the religion of the Druids. Baal was considered the source of all the gifts of nature; he passed off as the god of feasts of the earth, to whom people offered their firstfruits. He symbolized wisdom and fertility, in association with Ashtaroth.

One has only to compare the abominations committed by the Gauls with those of the Israelites to establish the common denominator between the religion of the two peoples. By the mouths of all of His prophets (Jeremiah 7:9, 19:5, etc.), the Eternal condemns without ceasing these abominations.

It is thus incontestable that the religion of the Druids is identical with that of the Israelites who turned from the Eternal. The two peoples practiced the same pagan religion, the same rites, the same cult!

This truth is one of the most evident proofs established that the Celtic peoples are none other than the scattered tribes of Israel!

Chapter 11:

Rites and Customs Among the Two Peoples

We have just established that Druidism was none other than a form of Baalism that the Israelites, as Celtic peoples, brought with them to Europe, during their successive migrations.

The two religions, having the same source of inspiration, had nearly the same pagan doctrines, that is to say, false and erroneous theories...

Chapter 12:

The Franks

There still remains one last important question which we must answer: if the Gauls are the descendants of the Reubenites who form, in essence, the French nation, who were the Franks in all this? Weren't these the ones who ended up giving their name to all transalpine Gaul? The response to this question is affirmative.

Who then, were these Franks? From whence did they come? What is the degree of parentage (if common parentage there is) between them and the Gauls? We will now briefly answer these diverse questions.

The Invasion of the Franks

Although Tacitus and Caesar speak of some Frankish tribes who inhabited the region between the River Main (in Germany) and the North Sea, it is important to note that, according to historians, the name Franks properly said does not appear in the pages of history before the year 241 B.C.

While remaining relatively silent on the origin of the Franks (that they don't know), historians designate them "a group of Germanic peoples" who lived primitively near the Rhine, and divide them in several distinct tribes.

But what is the exact number of Franks who entered Gaul? The answer is surprising:

"France became quite justifiably the name of a country in which there were only an imperceptible minority of Franks," ("Qu'est-ce qu'une Nation?" Renan), writes Renan, adding that in spite of the notable influence they left on the conquered country, in the course of one or two generations, the Norman invaders would not distinguish themselves any more from the rest of the population.

This opinion is both supported and shared by several other historians. Picard declares that it is not easy to determine what the great Frank invasions brought to Gaul after having destroyed a regime, which was no longer viable.

The character of the Franks was essentially destructive, states Picard. According to him, "the Germanic peoples brought of themselves nothing useful to Gaul, other than a little young blood" (La Civilization Merovingienne, Picard, p. 53).

Nevertheless, the role the Franks played in France, although very different from that of the Celts, has a special significance. Their entrance into the country, as we will establish it, represents the accomplishment of a phase of divine prophecy.

The Frankish Tribes

One of the principal reasons history considers the Franks a group of Germanic peoples, is the resemblance of their character and their mores with those of the Germanic peoples proper! If this comparison carries of itself a certain weight, it may not always constitute an irrefutable proof without the support of other factors.

Diverse Frankish tribes are grouped under the general term "Franks," and two of them were the most important and the most powerful: the Salian (pertaining to the Dutch river Yasel) Franks, and Rheinish Franks.

To say that all the Frankish tribes were of the Germanic race would be a gross error; that is not collaborated by one ethnological or historic proof. Those among them who were of the Germanic race possessed, naturally, the character and mores of the Germanic peoples. But the fact is that all the Frank tribes were not of the Germanic root.

Remember that, as a group, there were only an "imperceptible minority of Franks" in Gaul. The others, the main body of the Germanic tribes, established themselves in Germany on the shores of the Rhine.

The Rheinish Franks, just as most of the other Frankish tribes, were of the Germanic race; but it is not the same concerning the Salian Franks. As a whole, the Salian Franks were not Germanic: they were Israelites! And, for reasons we are going to examine, they were composed of, notably, descendants of the tribe of Judah.

The Salian Franks

Of all the Frankish tribes, that of the Salians was the most important. Their name, according to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, is derived from Lake Asphaltite (the Dead Sea known by its exceptionally strong saltiness), on the shores of which the Salians lived!

Where then is this lake "Asphaltite"? In Palestine, indeed, the same country previously inhabited by the tribes of Israel!

The history of the Salians is linked to legends of seas, continues the Encyclopaedia Britannica, stating that the same name "Merovingians," the first royal dynasty the Franks gave to France, means "from the sea," and is derived from the name of King Merovee who reigned in the fifth century.

If we lack the precise facts to determine conclusively what were the different Israelite tribes making up this group of Salian Franks who invaded Europe, we can at least affirm that the Salian Franks, who had come from the shores of Lake Asphaltite (the Dead Sea), must have been some of the descendants of Judah.

Why is this? Because the Eternal declared that David — who was of the descendants of the tribe of Judah — "would never lack a successor on the throne of the house of Israel"! (Jeremiah 33:17). This prophecy is explicit. (For details, see the work of Mr. Armstrong entitled: "The United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy.")

Indeed, it is the line of Merovingians, which make up still, today, the government of the Israelite nations. In light of this fact, the Salian Franks, who founded the Merovingian monarchy, must have been necessarily of the family of Judah.

The authenticity of this line can be easily verified, since the historic annals of the British royal family clearly reveal that the throne of David is continuing by the dynasty of Merovingian and Carolingian Kings.

The Name of France

Historians recognize that the Frank tribes that invaded Gaul represented not only an "imperceptible minority," but also that their influence was nearly negligible on the French spirit.

Speaking of all the Frankish tribes and of the Goths, Elisee Reclus states that "the Germans did not at all notably alter the Gaulic blood, for they were small in number" (Nouvelle Geographic Universelle, Article: France, Book II, Reclus).

For his part, Fustel de Coulanges mentions that "even the manner in which they (the Franks and the Goths) entered the country didn't permit them to change its face. All that is life in a nation and all ways of life there existed in Gaul after them" (Histoire des Institutions Politiques de l'Ancienne France, Coulanges).

Why then is it that the Franks (and not the Gauls) who, even though small in number, ended up giving their name to France?
Fustel de Coulanges gives us the answer in a simple and precise manner:

"The Franks, as is well-known, ended up even giving their name to all transalpine Gaul; but this fact has far less importance than one may attribute to it. Near the end of the Carolingian epoch, the name Gaul replaced it again..." (op. cit.).

But then what happened? How did the name "France" come to the fore again? It was, the famous French historian tells us, because of the predominance that the province called "L'ile de France" would have much later among the other great fiefs!

The name of the country of France does not indicate the origin of its inhabitants. A strange thing: that even the Reubenites had lost their name and identity, arriving in Europe under the name Gaul, that even Gaul lost its name following the invasion of the Frank tribes!

As the Royal Monarchy that the Salian Franks gave to France, to Great Britain, and to other Israelite nations, conforms to divine prophecy, the influence of the Frank tribes was almost negligible on the life and the character of the French.

The French are Israelites. The true ancestors are, before all, the Gauls, who were descendants of the Reubenites.


The Future According to Prophecy

With the exception of some passages of the Bible, which refer specifically to one or the other of the tribes of Israel, the Biblical prophecies relative to Israel refer as a whole to the twelve tribes. Consequently, the ultimate destiny of the French nation is intimately linked to that of the English, the Americans, the Belgians, the Swiss, the Scandinavians, and some other nations descended from the tribes of Israel. ...

All Israel lives in the midst of Babylon! "Come out of her [Babylon], My people, that you be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues," cries the Eternal (Revelation 18:4). But, the Israelite nations incline not an ear to this divine advice.

The sudden prosperity France and the other Israelite nations inherited since the end of their period of national banishment is only ephemeral, very ephemeral, given that each of them continues to reject the laws of God. Because of this, all these nations, as modern Israel, will be taken again into captivity (Luke 21:24). Full of the wine (sins) of her sister (Ezekiel 23:32), the nation of Israel will become "laughed to scorn, and held in derision"!

As far as the gradual loss of its colonies and the political difficulties it encountered actually to conserve its rank of "super power," France isn't the only one confronting these international problems: In this, it shares in the condition of all the other Israelite nations.

Because these Israelite nations refuse to turn to the voice of the Eternal, and they do not put in practice His laws, His commandments, and His statutes, the cursings predicted in the Bible, notably in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, already strike the whole of Israel, and come down ever more violently.

The Eternal declared to Israel: "I will break the pride of your power," Leviticus 26:19.

Modern Israel in Prophecy

See where France is today! The great nation which dictated, already two centuries ago, the course of history, and which dominated over European civilization, is in the midst of physical, moral, and spiritual decadence. It has lost the greater part of the acquisitions realized by the ancient regime, acquisitions especially considerable in North America and Southeast Asia.

At the Treaty of Paris in 1763, France in effect abandoned New France and India; soon after, it ceded Louisiana to Spain, then lost St. Dominica, in 1804, and the Isle of France of Mascarene, in 1810. The treaties of Paris of 1814-1815 left it only some small Antilles... French Guyana, some branches of Senegal and in India.... It was a negligible domain" (Larousse du Xxe siecle, Article: France).

If the different governments which succeeded since then reconstituted an overseas empire, France has lost in our time its new acquisitions, one after the other, at the price of its own blood! Laos, Vietnam, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria. Soon, it will again be reduced to the state of a "negligible domain"!

Also see where the United States stands, a country whose prosperity began, so to speak, with the purchase of Louisiana! The Americans — the invincible of the world! — are rapidly losing their pride and grandeur! Given over to the love of money, they have even become a source of degeneration in this expanding twentieth century.

And see where Great Britain is today, this "multitude of nations," this British Commonwealth on which the sun never set.... Stripped of its powers, of its "gates" (strategic locations of the earth), of its pride and most of its possessions, Great Britain is almost reduced to the small isles that it has always occupied!

Whether it be France, Great Britain, the United States of America, the Scandinavian Countries, or Belgium who has lost the Congo, or adding Switzerland or whatever other nation descended from Israel, each must answer before the Eternal for its own sins and its own disobedience. Each of them, individually and collectively, will fight and be beaten in the course of the Third World War, which already is appearing on the horizon. Each of them will fall under the yoke of the enemy — of a union composed of "ten kings" (Revelation 17), of which the head will be the "beast."

This union is already forming in Europe! (Apartian D. The French-Speaking Peoples In Prophecy. 1961, 1967; translated into English by Carol Kalin in 1975)

For purposes of length and applicability some portions of the above paper where not quoted in this section and/or are elsewhere in this paper. Here is a link to a complete pdf version of The French-Speaking Peoples In Prophecy.

Jewish Explanation of Reuben and France

While most Jews do not seem to know much about the modern identities of the so-called 'lost tribes,' some have attempted to research this. Here are some statements from Yair Davidiy:

"REUBEN" in Hebrew connotes: "See-ason" i.e. REU (pronounced  "roo") - BEN. Reuben became prominent amongst the French who were  dominated by the Ribuari and Rubi Franks and other groups named after clans of Reuben.

"See-a-son": The very name of Reuben denotes pride and a demand for personal honor. At the same time Reuben was born as compensation to his mother from God for the relative disrespect (or lesser love) shown her by her husband. ...

The Franks that settled France came from Reuben. The Franks that settled parts of Germany came from Dedan. The kingdom of the Franks became the most powerful kingdom in Europe. France became a very powerful nation before England did. In 476 BC Augustulus the last Roman emperor was deposed. Later in 486 Clovis the pagan leader of the Salian Franks became very powerful in Gaul. In 496 he became a convert to Roman Catholic church. Clovis became the first king of the Merovingian dynasty. During his reign Clovis eventually ruled most of what is today France and large parts of Germany etc. Let their be no doubt Reuben was then the strongest Israelite tribe in Europe. After Clovis died his kingdom was divided between his 4 sons (comp Gen 46:9). During the time of the Merovingian dynasty the Western Franks began to assimilate the Gallic latin based language while the Eastern Franks continued to speak their native Germanic language. Eventually the land dominated by the Western Franks became what is today known as France while the Eastern Franks became part of what is today known as Germany. The financial capital of Germany is today Frankfurt a city named after the Eastern Franks.

Most of the Western Franks were Reubenites while most of the Eastern Franks were Dedanites. In about 751 AD Pepin the powerful Mayor of the Palace deposed the last king of the Merovingian dynasty and became the king himself. He assumed the kingship with the blessing of the Pope. Pepin began the Carolingian dynasty of kings. In 768 AD Pepin's son Charlemagne became the king of the powerful Frankish kingdom. During his reign Charlemagne conquered a large part of Continental Europe and forcibly converted many people to Roman Catholicism. His empire included most of the German lands and France. In reward for his services, the Pope crowned Charlemagne as the Emperor of the Romans in 800 AD. This began the Holy Roman empire which lasted from 800 to 1806. Charlemagne made Aachen now in Germany his capital. It appeared that Charlemagne had more rapport with the Dedanite Eastern Franks. Charlemagne died in 814. His successor Louis I was an inept ruler. After Louis died in 840 the empire was divided up between his 3 sons. For a few years the 3 sons could not agree to how the empire should be divided. These 3 sons fought each other for 3 years. The treaty of Verdun later put an end to the conflict. By the terms of this treaty, Charles the Bald received a region which approximates to modern France, Louis II received a region which roughly approximates to modern Germany, and Lothair I received a region between the other two regions and received the title of Holy Roman emperor. Afterwards all the Holy Roman Emperors with the exception of Wenceslaus (Bohemia 1378-1400) came from Continental European Germanic States like Saxony, Austria, Luxembourg etc. None afterwards ever came from France. Eventually the Western Franks in France lost the use of their of their native Frankish tongue and spoke the Celtic Gallic tongue and absorbed many Gallic customs. The Western Reubenite Franks intermingled and intermarried with the Reubenite Gauls. The name France is derived from the Franks. The other Franks kept their Germanic speech. The divisions between the French Reubenite Franks and the Dedanite Franks of Germany became permanent. In 987 the French nobles rejected the rightful Carolingian claimant to the French crown and gave the crown to Hugh Capet, the Duke of France who founded the Capetian dynasty. Later the Capetian kings made Paris the capital of France. This is significant because there is a parallel between Reuben's history and the story of Paris the Trojan. When Troy was said to be a powerful kingdom in ancient Asia Minor, Paris a Trojan prince took Helen the wife of Menelaus the king of Sparta away from Greece to Troy. Paris committed fornication with Helen Menelaus's wife. This was a disgraceful thing. Just as Paris fornicated with someone else's wife and Troy was later destroyed Reuben fornicated with his father's concubine and lost his birthright. Later there were also other dynasties. The kingdom of France through the centuries waxed and waned a number of times.

Through the centuries there was quite a bit of contention between France and England. After Reuben lost his birthright, the descendants of Reuben became jealous of the descendants of Joseph who received the birthright in Reuben's place. ...

Reuben inherited part of Israel adjoining the Euphrates River. Descendants of Reuben were referred to as "Rabeans" in the Mari correspondence from northern Syria. Reuben was also recalled in Northeast "Syria", in the Geography of Ptolemy (based on Ancient Sources) as the Rahabbanai. After being exiled a portion of the tribe of Reuben was recorded as the Rhabbanai in East Scythia, and later as the Ribuari (Franks) in Gaul. "Ribuari" means Reubeni. They were also known as the Rubi.

CLANS OF REUBEN: Chanoch (Hanoch) became the Chauci, who were also known as the Hugo in both Scythia and the west. They became part of the Franks and Saxons. Palui (Phalu) is recalled in the region of Falia (Phalia in Germany) whence the Franks invaded Gaul. Chetsroni (Hezron) became the Chassuari and Istaevones (Sicambri). These peoples all were part of the Franks, who gave their name to France. Carmi: after being exiled was recalled in Carmania in southern Iran, in the Crimea of Scythia, and in the Carini Franks in Gaul. Gog (a clan of Reuben, 1-Chronicles 5:4) gave his name to Gogarene (a region of Iberia in the Caucasus), in the Land of Gog in Scythia north of Tibet, and in the name of the Goths and of the Lost Ten Tribes in popular traditions. Gog was also the name given to the head of a non-Israelite people (Ezekiel 38:2), so some confusion results.

A symbol of the Gauls was a cock and later France was represented by the sun. This is also a symbol of Reuben. The fleur-de-lis symbol of France is similar to the flower of the mandrake another symbol of Reuben.

The exiled Israelites became Scythians or at least part of the Scythians were Israelite and these in turn invaded Western Europe as "Barbarians". One of the major Barbarian confederacies was that of the Franks. The Franks were an alliance of several groups or rather a federation of several smaller combinations of tribes classified as Frankish and sharing some type of commonality. They seem to have been first reported about 256 c.e.1 when a group of them invaded Gaul, then passed into Spain and from there went to North Africa. Other Frankish-groups soon emerged from the northern Rhine region and began to expand in influence until they succeeded in subjugating the whole of Gaul that was then later called "France" in their honor, i.e. Land of the Franks. A song2 in Gaul dated from about 350 c.e. or earlier equated the Franks with the Persians and Sarmatians. Persians and Sarmatians had indeed neighbored the Scythians in Scythia. Other reports (such as that of Nicholas Vignier ca. 1630)3 also said that the Franks were originally Scyths or Sarmatians. The Franks appear to have gone at first to the mouth of the Rhine and from there began to move southwards. Old accounts4 say that the Franks had come from the former Saxon area of Maurunganie in North Germany below the place of the Normans. One version ("Geography of Ravenna", ca. 700's c.e.). states that the Franks had been in southern Denmark. Another source describes the Franks as, "A people whose name of old was the Deni [i.e. Danes]. The Frankish people is sprung from them, so the legend relates" (Ermoldus Nigellus 826)5.  This suggests that a part of the early Frankish leadership may once have been in Scandinavia.

Other very strong and consistent traditions6 connected the Franks (who were also called Frakkar and "Frygges") with Phrygia in the western portion of present day Turkey, with Troy (near Phrygia in Anatolia), and with Pannonia. Pannonia, in Roman times, referred to the area of Hungary but later usage7 applied the term to an extended area including the north and west. Whatever areas of temporary sojourn the Frankish peoples may have been in, their primary source of origin is to be sought in Scythia east of the Caspian. The Franks are traceable to the Hugie of the Scythian steppes and the Tectosaces and company who were there. The Vistula River-Pannonia path was one of the major routes into Europe from the steppe area and that was probably the route (or one of the routes) the Franks followed. The Franks were destined to conquer Celtic peoples including Galatians and settle in France. The Celts were then concentrated in Gaul (France) and Britain but had once been spread throughout much of Europe. Even before conquering Gaul the Franks had a proven ability to absorb other peoples, especially those of Celtic connection. The Franks moved from east to west and it is thus possible that on their way west they gathered in pockets of Cimmerians and Galatians known to have formerly been scattered in the southeast European area. There were early French historians who tried to find an ancestral connection between Franks and Galatians. The Franks eventually conquered Gaul the northern part of which was populated by the Galatians and some French writers said that the Franks were themselves mainly of Galatian origin. The Galatians or Galati were also known as Galadi and in French this is a form of the Hebrew name "Gilead".  The Tribe of Reuben had originally settled east of the Jordan in the land of Gilead (Joshua 22;9).

The Franks in northern Europe had first been known as "Huga"8 and this name is one of the indications linking them with the Hugie of Scythia. Amongst the Hugie of Scythia Tribal names (such as "Gali") associated with the Galatians existed. A Galatian connection could explain the Troy and Phrygian legendary associations of the Franks since a small but famous group of Galatians had returned from the west to the east, attacked Greece, crossed over from Europe into Asia Minor and then settled in Phrygia (near Troy) in Anatolia. Some Galatians had also (at another stage) gone further eastward into Scythia and these too may have linked up with the Hugie. The Galatians were descended from part of the ancient Cimmerians9 a portion of whom had previously (before moving into Europe) also sojourned for about 160 years in Phrygia. The Franks were to eventually settle in Holland, Belgium, and north France. They are mainly descended from the Tribe of Reuben though included contingents of other Israelites.

Before the exile, the Tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half-Menasseh had together been settled in GILEAD and Bashan on the eastern banks of the Jordan in the Land of Israel. Later part of the Tribe of Simeon also settled there (1-Chronicles 4;42). This pattern of settlement was to be paralleled later by descendants of these same tribes in Scythia.

There were some Galatian groups (such as the Tectosaces and Gala) in the Hugie federation of Scythia though most of the Galatians had reached Gaul, Britain, and the west much earlier and remained there. In Scythia the Hugie (of Reuben) were adjacent to the Goths of Gad and to the Amyrgian-Sakae descendants of Machir who had been the leading element in half-Menasseh, east of Jordan, in Israel. "GILEAD" was a name given to a good portion of the Land of Israel east of Jordan including that in which the Tribe of Reuben dwelt. Gilead was also the name of a son of Machir (son of Menasseh). The Galaadi or Galatians received their name either from the Israelite region of Gilead or from the Israelite clan of Gilead son of Menasseh who dwelt in part of Gilead. This is worth emphasizing since it can cause confusion: "Gilead" was an important clan in the Tribe of Menasseh east of the Jordan but the name "Gilead" could also be applied to the whole Israelite area east of the Jordan in which settled Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Menasseh.

The clan of Gilead comprised most of the Menasseh group that had been east of the Jordan in the Land of Israel and had neighbored Reuben who in turn had adjoined Simeon in the south. In Scythia the Samnitae of Simeon also neighbored the Hugie area. The name Hugie is derivable from that of Hagi, son of Gad, though most of the Hugie-Franks appear to have come from Reuben. The first son of Reuben was Hanoch (i.e. "Chanoch":çðåê, Genesis 48;9) and since "n" in both Hebrew and the Steppe dialects of Scythia appears to have been occasionally inserted and/or omitted for euphonic reasons in nomenclature maybe Hanoch and Hagi, though originally independent entities, became confused with each other due to familial connexion, geographical proximity and historical community.

A Scythian people, the Heniochi (cf. Hanochi of Reuben), had been reported of in the Caucasus region. To the east of Scythia (in "Serica") the RHABBANAEI10 of Reuben had bordered the Garinaei who are identifiable with Eri: or "Geri" (òøé) of Gad, the Damnae whose name elsewhere was pronounced like that of Dan, and the Aspacarae whose name is a form (as explained later) of Joseph. In the Land of ISRAEL, the tribe of REUBEN is called "Rahabbanai" on Ptolemy's map of "Arabia". Reuben in the Land of Israel east of the Jordan had adjoined half-Menasseh of Joseph and Gad. This is the same pattern as we later find in Serica east of Scythia. In west Europe the Franks were divided into several groups of whom the main ones are assumed to have been the Ripuarian Franks, the Salian Franks, and the Chatti or Hessians11. The Ripuarian Franks were allegedly so called by the Romans since they were first known to them on the banks of the Rhine [In Latin "ripa" means river bank]. The name is also given as Ribuari and this name in Hebrew is another form for  Reubeni. ...

The ancient Greeks and Romans (as well as the Hebrews), when they came across a foreign name, were wont to interpret its meaning according to  a similar sounding word in their own language. This was especially so when  the word in question was descriptively pertinent, as it was in the case of  the "River-bank" (i.e. "Ripuari") Franks on the Rhine. "Ribuari" however is how the name is sometimes rendered and appears to have been the Franks own name for themselves. "Ribuari" therefore means sons of Reuben which was the name of their ancestor. Reuben in Hebrew could also be rendered REUBAR! A  shortened form of Reuben is "Rubi" and a people by that name were situated  at one stage on the banks of the Rhine. They appear to have also been Ribuari Franks. In 276 c.e.12 the Franks were reported as encroaching on the borders of Roman Gaul together with the Alamans. They were pushed back to their bases on the Rhine after which they began a process of peaceful infiltration receiving lands from the Romans in return for military services.

Apart from the RIBUARI, the Franks included the Salian Franks and the Hessians. In the region of Holland, Salian Franks intermixed with Sigambri13. The Sigambri and Ambri (under the very same names) had encountered Alexander the Great east of the Caspian14 in Scythia and had also been reported besides Nysia on the Indus15.  The name Sigambri was another form used in Europe for Sicambrian and were represented (by Ptolemy) as the Scymbi-Scyths in the Hugie area of Scythia. They are associated with Secem, a clan of Menasseh.  Part of the Sigambri in Scythia neighbored the Salei, who according to Pliny had been east of the Caspian on the Jaxartes River banks16. The Salei in Europe became the Salian Franks and these intermixed with the Sicambri and became identified with them. In Scythia they had also been associated with each other. The Salians17 after merging with the Sicambri in Europe were henceforth altogether also known as Sicambri. These, due to Hun pressure in the early 400s c.e., overran Belgium and Northern France. At about the same time more Ripuarian Franks with Alamans entered Gaul from east of the Rhine where they had been centered in Westphalia. The Franks sojourned in East- and in West- Phalia. The name "PHALIA"18 wherein the Franks had been sojourning is derived from that of the PHALUI, descendants of the second son of Reuben (Numbers 26;5).

The Phalui or Falhi19 (Franks) in Eastphalhia were known also as Cheruski and were absorbed by the Saxons. There were Saxons contingents who later settled in Gaul alongside the Franks. The Phalian Franks descended from Phalui while the "Hugo" Franks (Chauci) came from both Gad (Hagi) and Hanoch of Reuben. Hanoch was recalled earlier in the Heniochoi who had been in the Scythian area of the Caucasus on the eastern coast of the Black Sea (Pliny, N.H. 6; 26).  The third son of Reuben, Hetsroni (Chetsroni), is recalled in the ISTAEVONES who were a division of the Germanic peoples enumerated by Tacitus and Pliny. They were said to comprise several tribes (Tacitus: "Germania" 2) but the only one identified for sure were the SICAMBRI who amalgamated with the Salian Franks20. The name Hetsron was to be connected to that of the Hessuari (Chattuari) who, together with the Chamavi, Bructeri, Amsivarians, and Sicambri, were in the northern sphere which the Franks later occupied and whose people became the HESSIAN Franks or Chatti21. The name HESSE may be derived from HUSHIM (Hus-im) son of Dan (Genesis 46; 23) and at first the Franks were attributed a DANISH origin or association. The fourth son of Reuben, Carmi:, is recalled in the CHARINI.

The Charini are included in the Vandili group by Pliny22 together with Vandili, Burgundians, and Gutones. [The Gutones were Goths descendants of Gad and past associates of Reuben]. Groups of Vandili were to settle in France. Carmi: is also a name associated with the Cimmerians. The Cimmerians for a time were based in southern Russia in the Crimea, which was named after them: The Crimea is known locally as "KRIM". In addition Carmi: gave his name to Carmania in southern Iran wherein and besides which several other groups from both Gad (Gadophydres, Pasar-gadae, Gadrosia) and Reuben (Carmania, Parthia, the Astaveni from Hetsroni) were noticeable in earlier times.  In Scythia the HUGIE (Franks) appeared in the area associated with the eastern Goths who were also called Tokharians or Togar. A similar name occurred in east Serica where the RHABBANAEI were neighboured by the Taguri and Thogara. The said names recall the THORINGI who were the main tribe of the RIBUARIAN Franks in Europe. The Ribuarian or "Ripuarian" Franks (of whom the primary tribe were the Thoringi) were known as RIBUARI23 which word in Hebrew would have had the same meaning as Reuben just like the Rhabbanei of Serica were named after Reuben. The names for the sons of Reuben parallel those of important Frankish groups; Hanoch=Hugo; Phalui=Falhi; and Hetsron (Chetsron)=Istaevone & Hessuari (Chattuari), with the fourth son Carmi: being represented by the Charini. All these groups were amongst the settlers of France.

 An important descendant of Reuben and apparently the founder of a clan (1-Chronicles 5;3) was called GOG. "GOG" is a name applicable to part of the Tribe of Reuben as well as being the name of a foreign northern king, "the chief prince of Meshek and Tubal"; "Gog, land of Magog" (Ezekiel 38;2-3). The Tribe of Reuben was intertwined to some extent with that of Gad which name in Hebrew could be pronounced like the name for GOTH. Maybe the Reubenite clan of Gog in the Caucasian province of Gogarene (Iberia) and its Gothic-connection caused later authors to confuse the Goths and Scyths with Gog and Magog? In Tibetan literature the area of Serica (once populated by the Rhabbanei and other groups) was at a time referred to as "Gog". Both Gog and Magog and the GOTHS were identified in folklore with the Ten Tribes of Israel24. ...

Part of the Tribe of Reuben had been important amongst them. France prior to the Franks was known as Gaul or Galia and its inhabitants were called Galli, which in popular Latin also means "rooster". The French later used a rooster or "cock" as their national animal representation and a crowing-cock in Jewish and General folklore is connected with the sunrise which conforms with the "Sun" or "Rising-sun" symbol of Reuben. So far, Reuben and the clans of Reuben have been traced to entities who eventually settled mainly in France, such as the Ribuari Franks (also known as the "Rubi") and their kin. Even so, the prevailing modern opinion is that most of the French are descended from the ancient Gauls, Celts, Aquitaners, and others of Celtic culture. Only a small minority (it is claimed -maybe wrongly) actually come from the Franks, Goths, Vandals, Normans, Alamans, and the like. It is these latter bodies who, from Scythia, invaded the west via Scandinavia and Germany.

The Celtic-associated populace (who, it is said, fathered most of the French) was composed of indigenous tribes together with others, such as the Cimmerian-Galatae, who arrived from the east. "GALATAE" is the name applied to the Gauls in Greek writings while the same people were called "Galli" by the Romans. Both "Galatae" and "Galli" are Hebrew nominations. "Galli" connotes both "Exiles" (as noted by Apartian) and "Galilaean". The name "Galatae" is rendered "Galadi" in some accounts and is a form of the Hebrew name "Gilead". 

In French translations of the Bible "Gilead" is written as "Galaad". "Gilead" was the name of an area in Israel east of the Jordan as well as being the name of the son of Machir, son of Menasseh, (Numbers 26;29) and an important clan-name encompassing most of  half Menasseh east of the Jordan. It is uncertain whether the area of "Gilead" (or "Galaad") was so named in honor of Gilead son of Machir or vice versa, Gilead having been named after the land his descendants were destined to inherit -at least, in part. After having exiled the Ten Tribes of Israel, the Assyrians re-formed the former area of Gilead together with parts of the lands of Reuben and Gad into the Province of "Galazu" which is their version of "Gilead". Similarly, the later Seleucian-Syrian Greek monarchs named approximately the same region "Galaaditis".

In the Book of Joshua it says that the Reubenites and Gadites and the half-tribe of Menasseh went unto the land of Gilead: "And the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-Tribe of Menasseh returned, and departed from the children of Israel out of Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan, to go unto the country of Gilead, to the land of their possession, whereof they were possessed..." (Joshua 22; 9). It follows from the above passage as well as from the Assyrian term "GALAZU" and the Seleucid "Galaaditis" that the name "Gilead" and its derivatives could be used to encompass all the lands of Reuben and Gad as well as that of "Gilead" proper within Menasseh. This inference is confirmed by existence until recently of a town in northern Syria south of the Euphrates named "Galaad", i.e. the name "Galaad" was found within the former territory of Reuben.

The appellation "Galaadi" or "Gileadi" or "Galatae" would therefore also be applicable to the former inhabitants of the "Gilead" area in its more general sense, which included descendants of Reuben. Since Frankish and other entities who settled in France bore names recalling Clans of Reuben and the character and positioning of France is applicable to Reuben, the GALATAE of France were also most likely derived from that portion of GILEAD belonging to REUBEN. A similar line of reasoning connects the Caledonians and Galedon of Britain to Gilead of Menasseh. Some points of interest are that: The sons of Reuben were destined (Zohar, VaYechi, 551, Sulam Edition) to wage war in the LAND OF ISRAEL against (or for) Jerusalem. It was the French "Franks" who led the Crusaders of Europe (1069-1270) in their attempts to conquer the Holy Land and Jerusalem. The French Emperor, Napoleon Bonaparte in 1799 offered to restore Palestine to the Jews. Whether Bonaparte had been genuine in his intention or not, it was the French together with the British who created the political climate which made possible the Balfour Declaration and ultimately the State of Israel. French Gentile volunteers fought on the Jewish side in Israel's War of Independence (1948 -1949).   The French for a short period ruled over the country of Syria (1920-1928) and Syria is within the territorial expanse once belonging to the Tribe of Reuben.  

According to the Book of Ezekiel (48;7) Reuben is destined to inherit its Tribal portion between Judah in the south and Ephraim in the north, i.e. in territory between the descendants of the Jews and of the British.

The name Reuben in Hebrew primarily means "See-a-son" (Rue-ben) though it also has connotations of increase ("Ribui") and plenitude. Of the sons of Reuben, "Hanoch" means "Inauguration", or "Education"; "Phalu" means "Distinction";   "Hetzron" denotes "Dweller-of -the-Courtyard"; and "Carmi:" is derivable from "Cerem" meaning "Vineyard". All of the above names acquire an additional significance when considered in the light of French history and culture. The French tend to emphasize high-quality educational requirements and are big on ceremonial: both characteristics being represented by the Hebrew name "Hanoch". They prefer quality to quantity and in some fields really are the best in their area, i.e. "Phallu" = Distinction. The French are famous both for their aristocrats and for their peasants and both types are implied in the Hebrew name "Hetsron" meaning courtyard-dweller. France is known for its good wines and expert wine-makers and "Carmi:" (i.e. "My Vineyard") was a son of Reuben.

PEOPLES OF REUBEN Rahabbanai in northeast "Syrian" Israel according to Ptolemy's Map; Rhabbanai (east Scythia). Ribuari (Franks), Rubi (Franks),

CLANS OF REUBEN: Chanoch = Chauci, Hugo (Franks, Saxons). Palui (Phalui) = Falia (Phalia in Germany whence the Franks invaded Gaul) Chetsroni = Chassuari (Franks), Istaevones (Sicambri-Franks). Carmi: = Carmania (in southern Iran), Crimea (Scythia), Carini (Franks in Gaul). Gog (a clan of Reuben) = Gogarene (Iberia in Caucasus), Gog (state in Scythia north of Tibet), name of Goths and of the Lost Ten Tribes in popular traditions.

Nemuel - Nemetes of Gaul (?)
An Israeli stamp depicts the mandrake symbol of Reuben. Below:  Weapon adornment pertaining to Frankish or Saxon settlers in Northern France.
Note the Star of David symbol.

The official emblem of France is its tri-color flag.  Previously the symbol used was the fleur-de-lis, which had been a royal emblem since the Dark Ages. The above emblem was adopted in the Third Republic as a  "quasi-official" one. The motto means, "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity", and these qualities (for both good and bad) were exemplified in the figure of Reuben whose Tribe dominates the Israelite element in France.

LIBERTY: Reuben acted with lack of propriety towards his father's concubine (Gen.37; 22) which was taking "liberty" too far, at the expense of others. REUBEN intended to set Joseph free and in effect saved his life (Gen.37; 22) which is an application of the principles of both LIBERTY and FRATERNITY.   At the same time Reuben was the first-born and should have acted with more authority; i.e. EQUALITY was misapplied. (Extracted from "The Tribes" by Yair Davidiy REUBEN; viewed 12/14/14)

While Yair Davidiy and Dibar Apartian did not agree on all points, they did on many and came to the same basic conclusion of most of the origins of the French.

Perhaps, one of the biggest differences between them involved the Franks. Both Yair Davidiy and Dibar Apartian wrote that there were different tribes amongst the Franks. Perhaps one or more of them had some connection, maybe through intermarriage, with the descendants of Reuben.

Biblical and Catholic Prophecy Tell of Troubles Coming to the French

What is ahead for the French?

Troubles, economic growth, and disaster.

3 Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately, 4 "Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?"

5 And Jesus, answering them, began to say: "Take heed that no one deceives you. 6 For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He,' and will deceive many. 7 But when you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be troubled; for such things must happen, but the end is not yet. 8 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. And there will be earthquakes in various places, and there will be famines and troubles. These are the beginnings of sorrows. (Mark 13:3-8)

It is likely that troubles for the French will include violent civil unrest.

The Bible shows that terrorism is prophesied for descendants of Israel, and that would include the French:

14 ‘But if you do not obey Me, and do not observe all these commandments, 15 and if you despise My statutes, or if your soul abhors My judgments, so that you do not perform all My commandments, but break My covenant, 16 I also will do this to you: I will even appoint terror over you, wasting disease and fever which shall consume the eyes and cause sorrow of heart. And you shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it. 17 I will set My face against you, and you shall be defeated by your enemies. Those who hate you shall reign over you, and you shall flee when no one pursues you. (Leviticus 26:14-17)

25 The sword shall destroy outside; There shall be terror within (Deuteronomy 32:25)

12 “Cry and wail, son of man; For it will be against My people, Against all the princes of Israel. Terrors including the sword will be against My people; Therefore strike your thigh. (Ezekiel 21:12) 12 Behold, these are the ungodly,Who are always at ease; They increase in riches…19 Oh, how they are brought to desolation, as in a moment! They are utterly consumed with terrors. (Psalms 73:12,19)

25 Because you disdained all my counsel, And would have none of my rebuke, 26 I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your terror comes, 27 When your terror comes like a storm, And your destruction comes like a whirlwind, When distress and anguish come upon you. (Proverbs 1:25-27)

5 Also they are afraid of height, And of terrors in the way (Ecclesiastes 12:5).

More terrorism should be expected in France, as well as other parts of Europe and the USA and Canada, etc.

As France has economic problems and a high Islamic population ("the terror within"?), those factors will likely collide and cause a backlash by the French.

In time, the French will turn to worship the Beast power (who will basically eliminate Islam per Daniel 11:40-43) as the Bible says:

4 So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, "Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?"

5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. (Revelation 13:4-8)

According to Catholic prophecy, the French will experience civil war and turn to a dictator called the Great Monarch. Certain Roman Catholics teach something called “the minor chastisement” is coming.  It is supposed to essentially be major civil unrest/civil wars in Europe because of Europe’s laxness in following Catholicism according to some sources--it seems like it could be consistent with the beginning of sorrows and troubles Jesus referred to. 

Notice specifically that Catholic prophecy says there will be civil strife across Europe, and especially involving France:

Desmond Birch (20th century): Civil war breaks out in France and Italy at almost the same time. This is the sign given by many prophets that the Chastisement has begun..(DA. Trial, Tribulation & Triumph: Before During and After Antichrist…The Great King will establish Peace and justice in civil matters on a worldwide basis, and protect the primacy of the Church in spiritual matters. Queenship Publishing Company, Goleta (CA), 1996, p. 554)

The Ecstatic of Tours…The revolution will spread to every French town. Wholesale slaughter will take place. This revolution will last only a few months but it will be frightful; blood will flow everywhere because the malice of the wicked will reach its highest pitch. Victims will be innumerable. Paris will look like a slaughter-house. Persecutions against the Church will be even greater, but it will not last long…Many bishops and priest will be put to death. The archbishop of Paris will be murdered…At this juncture, the French people will turn back to God and implore the Sacred Heart of Jesus and Mary Immaculate…The French people will ask for the good King, he who was chosen by God. He will come, this saviour whom God has spared for France, this King who is not wanted now because he is dear to God’s Heart. He will ascend to the throne; he will free the church and reassert the Pope’s rights… (Dupont Yves. Catholic Prophecy: The Coming Chastisement. TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1973, p.37)

Jeanne le Royer (Sister of the Nativity). The storm began in France, and France shall be the first theatre of its ravages after having been its cradle. (Dupont, p.59)

Prophecy of Mayence Woe to thee, great city (Paris); woe to thee, city of vice! Fire and sword shall succeed fire and famine. Courage faithful souls! The reign of the dark shadow shall not have time to execute all its schemes. But the time of mercy approaches. A prince of the nation is in your midst. He is the man of salvation, the wise, the invincible, he shall count his enterprises by his victories. He shall drive the enemy out of France, he shall march from victory to victory, until the day of divine justice. (Tzima Otto, H.  The Great Monarch and WWIII in Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Scriptural Prophecies. Verenika Press, Rock City (SC), 2000, pp. 156-147)

Foretelling the fall of France and England, the famous Jesuit Father Necton, said in 1772, “When England shall wane in power, the destruction of Paris will be near at hand” (Culligan E. The Last World War and the End of Time. The book was blessed by Pope Paul VI, 1966. TAN Books, Rockford (IL), p. 84).

Pseudo-Methodius (7th century): In France, people of Christians will fight and kill…At that same time the Muslims will be killed and they will know the tribulation…The Lord will give them to the powers of the Christians whose empire will be elevated above all empires…The Roman King (Great Monarch) will show a great indignation against those who will have denied Christ in Egypt or in Arabia (Araujo, Fabio R. Selected Prophecies and Prophets. BookSurge LLC, Charlestown (SC), 2007, pp. 101,103).

Rodolphus Gekner: Before the middle of the nineteenth century seditions shall arise in Europe, especially in France, Switzerland, and Italy. (Rossi G. THE CHRISTIAN TRUMPET, OR, Previsions and Predictions about Impending General Calamities, The Universal Triumph of the Church, The Coming of Antichrist, The Last Judgment, and The End of the World. Compiled by PELLEGRINO [Gaudentius Rossi], A Missionary Priest with Superior’s permission. Boston, THOS. B. NOONAND & CO., 1873,, p. 132)

Blessed Anna Maria Taigi (died 1837): “described to me the great ordeal ahead. Rome would be battered by revolutions…Millions of men would die by the sword in war and civil strife, other millions would perish in unforeseen death. (Bessieres A. Wife, Mother and Mystic (Blessed Anna Maria Taigi). Nihil Obstat: Carlos Davis, S.T.L. Imprimatur: E Morrough Bernard, Westmonasteri, die Februari, 1952. Reprint TAN Books, Rockford (IL), 1982, p. 166)

Birch Tree Prophecy (Old German) “When the world becomes Godless: revolutions will break out against kings; fathers will be against sons and sons against fathers; dogma will be perverted; men will try to overthrow the Catholic Church…A terrible war will find the north fighting against the south. The south will be led by a Prince wearing a white coat with a cross on the front…” (Culleton, R. Gerald. The Prophets and Our Times. Nihil Obstat: L. Arvin. Imprimatur: Philip G. Scher, Bishop of Monterey-Fresno, November 15, 1941. Reprint 1974, TAN Books, Rockford (IL), p. 143).

Jean Paul Richter (d. 1809): Through a terrible purgatory Europe will return to the faith (Culleton, p. 182).

Old English Prophecy (On a tombstone at the Kirby cemetery, Essex).  When pictures look alive, with movements free, (T.V. and movies)  When ships like fish swim beneath the sea, (Submarines) When outstripping birds can soar in the sky (Jets and rockets) The half the world drenched in blood shall die…In Germany begins a dance, Which passes through Italy, Spain, and France, But England shall pay the piper. (Dupont, pp. 21-22)

Monk Hilarion (d. 1476): The people of the Peninsula of Europe will suffer by unnecessary wars until the Holy Man comes (Culleton, p. 137).

Brother Louis Rocco (19th century): Terrible wars will rage all over Europe…Russia will witness many outrages. Great cities and small towns alike will be destroyed in a bloody revolution… (Dupont, p.76)

Brother Louis Rocco
(19th century): All over Europe there will rage terrible civil wars…The German sections of Austria will join Germany, so will also the commercial cities of Belgium and Switzerland. A Catholic descendant of a German imperial house will rule a united Germany with peace, prosperity and great power, for God will be with this sovereign (the Great Monarch?)…A Great Monarch will arise after a period of terrible wars and persecutions in Europe. He will be a Catholic; he will not be a German (Culleton, p. 195).

Priest Lavinsky (died 1708): The world will be harassed by civil wars…the Cross, to the astonishment of all, will shine in double splendor through many lands because of the great ruler (Connor Edward. Prophecy for Today. Imprimatur + A.J. Willinger, Bishop of Monterey-Fresno; Reprint: Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford (IL), 1984, pp.36-37).

John of the Cleft Rock (1340): The White Eagle (Great Monarch), by order of the Archangel Michael, will drive crescent from Europe where none but Christians will remain–he himself will rule from Constantinople. An era of peace and prosperity will begin for the world. There will no longer be Protestants {there were no “Protestants” then and author Connor of that book suggests that perhaps this word should have been translated as heretics} or schismatics…God will raise up a holy Pope (Connor, pp. 33-34)

Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser (died 1658):…”When everything has been ruined by war; when Catholics are hard pressed by traitorous co-religionists and heretics; when the Church and her servants are denied their rights, the monarchies have been abolished and their rulers murdered…then the hand of Almighty God will work a marvelous change, something apparently impossible according to human understanding. There will rise a valiant monarch anointed by God. He will be a Catholic, a descendant of Louis IX, (yet) a descendant of an ancient imperial German family, born in exile. He will rule supreme in temporal matters. (Connor, pp.35-36)

Priest Nectou S.J. (d. 1772): They indeed shall conspire for the destruction of the Church; but the time shall not be allowed them, because this frightful crisis shall be for a short duration. When all will be considered lost, all shall be found safe…The triumph of the Church will then be so complete that nothing like it shall ever be seen…A man disliked by France will be placed on the throne…(Culleton, p. 176; cf. Dupont, p. 48).

If civil war/riots/civil unrest do occur in Europe on a larger scale, this likely will set the stage for the rising up of a military leader to resolve this.  Catholic prophecies specifically suggest that this will happen and they tend to refer to this leader as the “Great Monarch” (or the “Great King”)–of course, Catholic prophecies also have certain contradictions–but many are consistent with biblical prophecy. The belief that those in France (as shown above) will turn to “Mary” is consistent with certain biblical (Isaiah 47; Revelation 17; 2 Thessalonians 2:8-12) and other Catholic prophecies as detailed in my book Fatima Shock!

This "Great Monarch," however, seems to have a lot in common with the prophesied final King of the North and Beast from the Bible. 

Catholic prophecy teaches that the "Great Monarch" will change the Catholic faith: (cf. Daniel 11:37-38), so much that some of the French clergy will be offended:

D. Birch (20th century): Many of the prophecies speak of the fact that the Great King at first will not be well-liked, especially by the French clergy (Birch, pp. 276)

However, they also teach thaa pontiff who does miracles will crown him as the final ‘Holy Roman Emperor’:

Bl. Anna-Maria Taigi (19th Century)…”After the three days of darkness, St. Peter and St. Paul, having come down from Heaven, will preach in the whole world and designate a new Pope. A great light will flash from their bodies and will settle upon the cardinal who is to become Pope. Christianity, then, will spread throughout the world. He is the Holy Pontiff, chosen by God to withstand the storm. At the end, he will have the gift of miracles, and his name shall be praised over the whole earth (Birch, pp. 362-363).

The Great King will be crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the reigning Pope (Birch, p. 555).

This “Great Monarch,” however, seems to have a lot in common with the prophesied final King of the North (Daniel 11:21-45) and Beast of the sea from the Bible (Revelation 13:1-10).  So, if there is major civil unrest across Europe, and including France, this would seem to indicate that this leader could rise up fairly soon.

The Bible tells of a basically European kingdom that will be partially strong, partially weak, and with a fragile unity (Daniel 2:41-43), but that will have a frightening type of economic dominance (see Revelation chapters 13,17,18). This kingdom will have a religion and it will not be Islam. Europe is prophesied to make a deceitful deal with an Islamic power (Daniel 11:27) and this deal might partially happen because of immigration policies and civil unrest.

The Bible also tells of a time when a European power will reorganize (Revelation 17:12-13). While I do not believe that we are to the point of fulfilling the reorganization required by Revelation 17:12-13 (see also Must the Ten Kings of Revelation 17:12 Rule over Ten Currently Existing Nations?), it seems that a variety of steps will be necessary for the final reorganization to occur. Some of those steps, especially if they involve austerity/budget cuts and immigration policies, may stir more violent protests in the future. Violent protests can lead to militaristic leaders rising up, and a major militaristic leader rising up is consistent with biblical prophecy (cf. Daniel 11:39-44; Revelation 13:3-4).

The French will be induced to follow the Beast. This Beast will control buying and selling:

14 And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived. 15 He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast to be killed. 16 He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. (Revelation 13:14-17)

The world, including for a time the French, will prosper from this, but it will not last (Revelation 18). Those who think that they are God's people, French or otherwise, are warned to NOT remain part of this coming Babylonian Beast power:

4 And I heard another voice from heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues. 5 For her sins have reached to heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities. 6 Render to her just as she rendered to you, and repay her double according to her works; in the cup which she has mixed, mix double for her. 7 In the measure that she glorified herself and lived luxuriously, in the same measure give her torment and sorrow; for she says in her heart, 'I sit as queen, and am no widow, and will not see sorrow.' 8 Therefore her plagues will come in one day — death and mourning and famine. And she will be utterly burned with fire, for strong is the Lord God who judges her.

9 "The kings of the earth who committed fornication and lived luxuriously with her will weep and lament for her, when they see the smoke of her burning, 10 standing at a distance for fear of her torment, saying, 'Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! For in one hour your judgment has come.' (Revelation 18:4-10)

And at least some of Reuben will resist (see Revelation 7:1-5).

It should be noted that Ezekiel 5 shows that after the USA and probably its Anglo-Saxon descended allies are eliminated, problems will spread to "all the house of Israel":

1 "And you, son of man, take a sharp sword, take it as a barber's razor, and pass it over your head and your beard; then take scales to weigh and divide the hair. 2 You shall burn with fire one-third in the midst of the city, when the days of the siege are finished; then you shall take one-third and strike around it with the sword, and one-third you shall scatter in the wind: I will draw out a sword after them. 3 You shall also take a small number of them and bind them in the edge of your garment. 4 Then take some of them again and throw them into the midst of the fire, and burn them in the fire. From there a fire will go out into all the house of Israel. (Ezekiel 5:1-4)

Notice that after 1/3 is destroyed by fire (perhaps a reference to nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction), a third struck by other weapons, and one-third will be scattered, then there is other fire and after all of that, "fire will go out into all the house of Israel."

Some of wondered if Israelitish-descended nations such as France could be part of the final Beast power. History shows us that France was part of old Roman Empire and parts of it were part of the so-called 'Holy Roman Empire.' The fact that at least part of France was part of the beasts in Daniel 2:40-43 and 7:2-8, should show all that it, for a time, can be part of the final Beast power. But they will ultimately be hurt by it.

Dibar Apartian taught:

Frenchmen are convinced today that their country is headed toward power and prosperity. Their UNION with Germany and the other nations of the Common Market fills them with a sense of security. ...

a political UNION of TEN nations or governments-which the Bible calls "the beast"-will rise in Europe in the end time. This union of ten European nations will MAKE WAR with the descendants of Jacob, particularly the two sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, whose modern descendants are the peoples of the BRITISH COMMONWEALTH and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

This soon-coming union of ten nations or governments prophetically represents the last "head" of the resurrected "beast"-the revival of the "Holy Roman Empire" (Rev. 17 :9- 1 2). But contrary to what you may think, it will NOT consist only of Gentile nations. It will INCLUDE a group of ISRAELITISH nations. "Come out of her , my people," says God in Revelation 18:4. "My people" means Israelites in Bible prophecy. Yes, once again, Joseph' s own brothers will sell him to the Gentiles!

Once again REUBEN (the first-born of Jacob who anciently conspired with his brothers, will "act" in terms of saving him, but end · up by compromising with his brothers to send him into CAPTIVITY.

Ever since the early days of American history, the French have been on our side. There exists a brotherly link among all the ISRAELITISH nations. Nevertheless, by uniting politically with the "beast," some of the modern Israelites will be instrumental in conquering the United States and Great Britain.

So says YOUR Bible! ...

What then will happen to France? Will she win the next WAR? She is presently a member of the "Common Market" which is already becoming a POLITICAL union. It will eventually include TEN nations or kingdoms. (Apartian D. De Gaulle and the Next World War. Plain Truth, September 1964, p. 11)

What then will be the future of France? What will be her role just before the second coming of Jesus Christ? In the 17th chapter of Revelation, we read of TEN KINGS (or Kingdoms) that will rise in Europe during the last days just prior to Christ's rerum. The prophecy shows they will war against the British and the American peoples.

"And the ten horns which thou sawest are TEN kings (kingdoms), which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the BEAST" (Rev. 17:12).

France REPRESENTS today one of these 10 Kings. This Union of 10 Kingdoms is already in formation in Europe. In fact, France is at present one of its key members. As this prophecy reveals, this union will receive authority "for one hour" only-that is, a short time-because it is like "iron mixed with miry clay" (Dan. 2:43) ...

Ask any average Frenchman what he thinks of his country's union with Germany. He is utterly puzzled at the idea that economic and political barriers are gradually falling between France and Germany. This union for him is unreal but demanded by the circumstances in which France today finds herself. It is a creation of the leaders of the two nations who blindly believe in its destiny. (Apartian D. Prophecy Reveals the Future of France. Plain Truth, August 1963, p. 19)

During the last two WORLD WARS France was at the side of her natural allies, the Anglo-Saxons. They are, indeed, her natural allies because the French people, in turn, are the modern DESCENDANTS of one of the twelve tribes of Israel, namely REUBEN! The situation, however, will be quite different during the next WORLD WAR, France will no longer fight at the side of her former allies; she will turn AGAINST them. The descendants of Reuben will play their part in selling into slavery their brother Joseph - just as Reuben did some 3700 years ago. You are now beginning to see why the relations between the United States of America and France are gradually deteriorating. (Apartian D. France: The Enigma of our Time. Plain Truth, August 1966, pp. 11-12)

(Gen. 37:18-20). Notice well what took place. The brothers CONSPIRED against Joseph; filled with jealousy, they wanted to KILL him. Afterwards, they would LIE to their father, telling him that a wild beast had devoured Joseph. What about the next two verses, some may argue? Well, let's once again examine them in the light of the Biblical account, and let US not be misled by our human reasoning.

"And Reuben heard it [the plot to kill Joseph], and he delivered him out of their hands; and said, Let us not kill him. And Reuben said unto them, Shed no blood, but cast him into this pit that is in the wilderness, and lay no hand Upon him; that he might rid him out of their hands, to deliver him to his father again (verses 21, 22).

At first glance, it may seem, indeed , as though Reuben acted well. He proposed an alternative to deliver Joseph out of his brothers' hands. This sounds good to our human mind, to our carnal way of thinking. But is that what was expected of Reuben? Is that all he could do- he, the firstborn? Was his duty to compromise with his brothers over whom he had authority? According to the Bible, a firstborn in Israel had certain privileges his brothers did not have. His heritage was bigger and he received the greater portion of the blessings. He was next to his father in power and authority. Therefore, as the leader of his brothers, Reuben was actually RESPONSIBLE for what happened to Joseph. He should have acted the way Jacob, his father, would have acted had he been there- and not have compromised with them. Many overlook this important point when they read this story. Consequently, they don't see where Reuben failed. No, Reuben did NOT act with courage and dignity. He was afraid of his brothers; he FEARED for his own life if he tried to stop them by force. COMPROMISE is all he could think of - but compromise is a very poor substitute for one's own duties and responsibilities. ...

A Striking Parallel

There may be a striking parallel between Reuben's behavior in the past and that of France today. Indeed, in a few years, Reuben's modern descendants will be at the side of the prophesied "beast" of Revelation when the Anglo-Saxons (the descendants of Joseph) are taken captive. France, like her forefather Reuben, will probably seek a compromise to prevent her former allies - the very SONS of Joseph - from being taken captive by the enemy. But what good will that really do? What good did it do to Joseph?

A compromise never relieves one from one's own responsibilities. Without a doubt, Reuben loved his brother; he exerted himself in his own ways, through his own human reasoning, to save him. But the fact remains that he ended up by acting like a foe! France today also likes her "kin," her natural allies. But, unless she repents, France will end up BEING a foe!

(Apartian D. France: The Enigma of our Time. Plain Truth, August 1966, p. 32)

Like all nations today, France has turned away from God. Catholic by faith, 9 out of 10 Frenchmen have never read their Bible, nor do they believe that, in its entirety, it represents the WORD OF GOD. What then will happen to France? Will she win the next WAR? She is presently a member of the "Common Market" which is already becoming a POLITICAL union. It will eventually include TEN nations or kingdoms.

Will this union win the third WORLD WAR?

God says that though He will allow it for a short while to conquer the descendants of Joseph (the BRITISH and AMERICAN peoples), He Himself will intervene to deliver His people. Jesus Christ, at His second coming, will fight and destroy those nations who rebel against Him (Rev. 17 : -14). (Apartian D. De Gaulle and the Next World War. Plain Truth, September 1964, p. 41)

At the second coming of Jesus Christ, the TEN KINGS or KINGDOMS-including France-will be of "one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast" (Rev. 17:13).

"These shall make war with the Lamb , (Jesus Christ, and the lamb shall overcome them; for he is LORD of lords, and KING of kings: and they that are with Him are called, and chosen, and faithful" (Rev. 17:14).

This is the infallible prophecy of the Bible. Unless France wakes up and repents, she and the other nations will fight the Lord at His coming. They will be punished by sword, by famine and pestilence-by the plagues of Almighty God! (Apartian D. Prophecy Reveals the Future of France. Plain Truth, August 1963, p. 22)

So, unlike some in groups like the Living Church of God (LCG) (see Must the Ten Kings of Revelation 17:12 Rule over Ten Currently Existing Nations?), Dibar Apartian realized that some of the Israelitish nations would be part of the Beast and will betray the sons of Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh; see also Anglo - America in Prophecy & the Lost Tribes of Israel).

Here are some items that LCG published:

French Influence in Europe Waning

Bible prophecy reveals the Israelite-descended nations will go into captivity under the European “beast” power at the time of the end. But, will France be inside or outside the “beast” power? The increasing EU frustration with France will be interesting to watch. (French Influence in Europe Waning. TW News & Prophecy, March 27, 2015).

France’s Tumble from the Top

France has been a major player in the development of the EU. However, France is an Israelite-descended nation. (France’s Tumble from the Top. TW News & Prophecy, June 30, 2014).

Whom Will France Support?

As core nations in the EU seek to form a European military, Britain and France are formulating other plans. …

For decades the Church of God has taught that a European Beast power composed of 10 nations or kings will emerge at the end of the age and play a dominant role in the world (Revelation 17 and 18). Bible prophecies indicate that most Israelite nations will not be a part of this empire (Ezekiel 23:9, 22-27; Hosea 11:5-7; Amos 5:3). The question is, will France support Europe or join with “brother” England? Time will tell. (Whom Will France Support? TW News & Prophecy, November 11, 2013).

Will France Exit the EU?

While France may not leave the EU in the immediate future, the Front National’s win highlights changing political winds in France and the growing unrest with the Brussels-centered EU. Some experts suggest this recent local election win is just the “tip of the iceberg”…

For decades the Church of God has understood that the end-time European Beast power will be ten kings or nations who give their power to that Beast (see Revelation 17). Bible prophecies indicate that most Israelite-descended nations will be overcome by that Beast and not be part of it (Ezekiel 23:9, 22-27; Hosea 11:5-7; Amos 5:3). It will be interesting to see what France will do. (Will France Exit the EU? TW News & Prophecy, October 21, 2013)

A coming “world political authority”?

The Bible predicts that, at the time of the end, ten kings will temporarily give their authority in an uneasy alliance to the “King of the North” (Daniel 2:41-43; Revelation 17:12-13)! The result will be a German-dominated European economic, military and religious superpower. It will reign for a short time, and it will not be friendly to the United States, England or France. A coming “world political authority”? TW News & Prophecy, November 3, 2011)

LCG‘s view of France in prophecy was one of many issues that Dibar Apartian had with that group (for more details, see Dibar Apartian, me, and LCG).

The late Herbert W. Armstrong agreed with Dibar Apartian:

Poland, and as you know Romania is not really very enthusiastic with the Soviet, and neither is Yugoslavia. And I can begin to see some of those nations breaking loose from the Russian orbit and going in.

Instead of the Scandinavian nations, they will go in with France and Germany; and with Spain and Portugal and Italy, and form the ten ... with the Roman...and that will be the same territory that was occupied by the old Roman Empire. That is coming along. (Armstrong HW. Beasts of Daniel and Revelation. Bible Study, Date: November 8, 1980)

Perhaps it should to be pointed out that several of the "Israelite nations' are ethnically mixed (per Davidiy Y. The Tribes, 4th edition. Russell-David Publishers, 2011 and other sources) and it may take them some time for the actual Israelites to separate out. Including some of Reuben.

It may be of interest to note that on March 10, 2018, French President Emmanuel Macron expressed his desire to make his country “India’s best partner in Europe,” replacing Britain as India’s “gateway to Europe ... Your historical partner in Europe was the United Kingdom, and I want France to become the new partner” (see Emmanuel Macron wants France to replace Britain as India’s ‘gateway to Europe’).

The Catholic Church of France is sometimes called the "eldest daughter of the Church" owing to its early connection to the Church of Rome from the time of the heretic Irenaeus of Lyon. Some say it began at the time of the Frankish king Clovis (5th-6th century), while others say the title came a little later at the time of Charlemagne (8th-9th century). Charlemagne has been called:

the "Father of Europe" (pater Europae). Charlemagne united most of Western Europe for the first time since the Roman Empire. His rule spurred the Carolingian Renaissance, a period of cultural and intellectual activity within the Catholic Church. Both the French and German monarchies considered their kingdoms to be descendants of Charlemagne's empire. (Charlemagne, Wikipedia, 12/26/14)

Much of France is nominally Roman Catholic and has long accepted the religion of the Roman Emperor Constantine.

At this time, the French Head of State is allegedly the only temporal power in the world still nominating Catholic bishops, namely the Bishop of Metz and the Archbishop of Strassburg. The proposed bishops are approved by the Pope but formally nominated by the President of France following diplomatic exchanges with the Vatican through the nunciature.

The Bible discusses a fallen church on seven hills/mountains that has fallen daughters in Revelation 17.

France has had involvement with "Marian" apparitions. Notice the following report:

Of the fifteen apparitions of the Virgin Mary officially confirmed by the Holy See through the world, fully one-third have occurred in France. The history of Marian apparitions in France begins in 1208. Until her last appearance in 1871, Mary appeared in turn to a Spanish friar in the south of France, a teenage shepherdess in the French Alps, two cloistered nuns in Paris, two young cowherds in the Alps, a simple girl in the foothills of the Pyrenees and a group of villagers in the path of an advancing Prussian army.

The Apparition of the Rosary

Our Lady first appeared to religious founder Dominic Guzman in 1208 in the Church of Prouille, in Languedoc, France, considered the “cradle of the Dominicans.” Legend has it that Saint Dominic received the Rosary there, which became the tool of the Dominicans in battling the Albigensian heresy, rife in that area. viewed 12/26/14

The Dominicans were the group that carried out the Inquisition. The 19th century Catholic saint and doctor of the church, Thérèse of Lisieux, allegedly saw Mary a couple of times. On March 15, 1907, Pope St. Pius X, in a private conversation, called Therese of Lisieux  “The greatest Saint of modern times” ( viewed 12/26/14).

12,000 Must Make it To the Day of the Lord

The Bible tells of an apparently Russian led confederation that will destroy the end time 'daughter of Babylon':

41 "Behold, a people shall come from the north,
And a great nation and many kings
Shall be raised up from the ends of the earth.
42 They shall hold the bow and the lance;
They are cruel and shall not show mercy.
Their voice shall roar like the sea;
They shall ride on horses,
Set in array, like a man for the battle,
Against you, O daughter of Babylon.

43 "The king of Babylon has heard the report about them,
And his hands grow feeble;
Anguish has taken hold of him,
Pangs as of a woman in childbirth..."(Jeremiah 50:41-43).

Presuming France has still at least nominal connections with the Beast, France will be affected. The Russians have a missile coming dubbed 'Satan 2' by NATO that allegedly could destroy France.

Whether or not Russia will ultimately use that against France is an open question.

But even if Russia did, all the French on the earth will not be destroyed.

The term 'Reuben' is used once in the New Testament. It is in the Book of Revelation and related to a group of 144,000 who are sealed as being the servants of God.

While there are some concerns that the following refers to only to spiritual descendants, it may very well be teaching that at least 12,000 physical descendants of Reuben will be following God by then and be sealed near the time of the 'Day of the Lord' which begins about 2 1/2 years after the start of the Great Tribulation:

1 After these things I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, on the sea, or on any tree. 2 Then I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God. And he cried with a loud voice to the four angels to whom it was granted to harm the earth and the sea, 3 saying, "Do not harm the earth, the sea, or the trees till we have sealed the servants of our God on their foreheads." 4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed. One hundred and forty-four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel were sealed:

5 of the tribe of Judah twelve thousand were sealed;
of the tribe of Reuben twelve thousand were sealed; (Revelation 7:1-5)

So not all of Reuben will be idolaters at the end. And not all are now. And not all the French will be destroyed.

Reuben's Sons and Glorious Future

The Bible lists four sons of Reuben:

8 Now these were the names of the children of Israel, Jacob and his sons, who went to Egypt: Reuben was Jacob's firstborn. 9 The sons of Reuben were Hanoch, Pallu, Hezron, and Carmi. (Genesis 46:8-9)

Here are some comments and speculations related to each of them:

It is possible to understand each of Reuben’s sons as a period in Reuben’s history. Hanoch Reuben’s 1st son mean initiated or educated. In the 5th and 6th centuries AD the Reubenite Franks became converts to the Roman Catholic religion. The Franks were initiated and educated in Roman Catholicism. Clovis I (496 AD-) and other later Frankish kings became champions of the Roman Catholic Church.

Pallu Reuben’s 2nd son means separated and distinguished. After Charlemagne the Reubenite Franks through linguistic and other differences were separated from the Dedanite German Franks. Later France became a distinguished exalted Reubenite nation in Europe. She was at the peak of her influence during the Napoleanic era.

Hezron Reuben’s 3rd son means enclosure, enclosed court, enclosed by a wall. The Pallu era finished about 1871 after the fall of Napolean III. Later France was dominated by a Defensive mentality one way or other. Her security concerns dominated her thinking. At the moment France is in the Hezron protectionist era. During this era her enemies will perceive her unwillingness to act and exploit it. France shall be broken from within and without.

Carmi Reuben’s fourth and last son means vinedresser. This refers to a period when Reuben receives his lot with the other eleven tribes in the future Millennial kingdom of Israel in the Middle East. At that time the Messiah shall rule the earth with a rod of iron and peace shall prevail. Reuben will be able to enjoy the fruit of his labours in peace. There will be no more crying or tears. Reuben shall be redeemed. (David James Skelly with additions by Peter Salemi. ORIGIN OF FRANCE AND ITS PEOPLES. viewed 12/14/14)

Reuben eventually will flourish in the future millennial kingdom. One of the apostles will rule over them:

24 Now there was also a dispute among them, as to which of them should be considered the greatest. 25 And He said to them, "The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and those who exercise authority over them are called 'benefactors.' 26 But not so among you; on the contrary, he who is greatest among you, let him be as the younger, and he who governs as he who serves. 27 For who is greater, he who sits at the table, or he who serves? Is it not he who sits at the table? Yet I am among you as the One who serves.

28 "But you are those who have continued with Me in My trials. 29 And I bestow upon you a kingdom, just as My Father bestowed one upon Me, 30 that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (Luke 22:24-30)

So, an original apostle will rule over Reuben.

There will be a gate, a pearl, and other items associated with Reuben:

9 Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came to me and talked with me, saying, "Come, I will show you the bride, the Lamb's wife." 10 And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me the great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, 11 having the glory of God. Her light was like a most precious stone, like a jasper stone, clear as crystal. 12 Also she had a great and high wall with twelve gates, and twelve angels at the gates, and names written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel: 13 three gates on the east, three gates on the north, three gates on the south, and three gates on the west.

14 Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. 15 And he who talked with me had a gold reed to measure the city, its gates, and its wall. 16 The city is laid out as a square; its length is as great as its breadth. And he measured the city with the reed: twelve thousand furlongs. Its length, breadth, and height are equal. 17 Then he measured its wall: one hundred and forty-four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of an angel. 18 The construction of its wall was of jasper; and the city was pure gold, like clear glass. 19 The foundations of the wall of the city were adorned with all kinds of precious stones: the first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third chalcedony, the fourth emerald, 20 the fifth sardonyx, the sixth sardius, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth chrysoprase, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst. 21 The twelve gates were twelve pearls: each individual gate was of one pearl. And the street of the city was pure gold, like transparent glass. (Revelation 21:9-21)

A truly glorious and wonderful future is ahead for the French peoples. However, there will be serious problems that they will face before then.

Those looking for the true Christian church in the 21st century, should consider reading the booklet Where is the True Christian Church Today? which is also available in the French language Où est la vraie Église Chrétienne aujourd’hui?

Thiel B. The 'Lost Tribe' of Reuben: France in Prophecy? COGwriter (c) 2014/2015/2016/2018/2019 1105

A two-part sermon related to history and prophecy is available online: The 'Lost Tribe' of Reuben and France and Prophecy.

Back to home page