Although the Bible is the main source of information in this article, there are quotations given in support from various Jewish encyclopedia -- as well as from the Roman historian Josephus. Modern Jewry should find no offence at direct quotations from their own written encyclopedia. Modern Jewry is able to talk about being the singular ancient people chosen by YEHOVAH God, about being Edom and also about being multi-racial at the same time. Christians and non-Christians have been misled into thinking that the word “Jews” refers to a singular race of people being YEHOVAH’s chosen people, but in fact, this is not so. The “Jews” returning to the State of Israel today are multi-racial and we could hardly admit that a Chinese Jew and a Negro Jew are of the same race, in the historic meaning of the word "race".

We will start with three references from “Jewish” sources which may help those who have been led to believe that the word “Jews” relates specifically to Israelites.

1). From Alfred M. Lilienthal’s book What Price Israel: “Here’s a paradox: an anthropological fact, many Christians have more Hebrew-Israelite blood in their veins than their Jewish neighbors”.

2). According to Rabbi Yaakov Kleiman in his book DNA & Tradition: The Genetic Link to the Ancient Hebrews: "It should be emphasized that being Jewish is not defined genetically. The traditional conversion process into Judaism, sanctioned by Torah Law, allows people of all backgrounds, nationalities or physical features to join the Jewish people. Jews are a people, a nation, and primarily a belief community...Dr. Karl Skorecki, discoverer of the 'Cohen Gene' emphasizes that 'being Jewish is a spiritual, metaphysical state, and DNA is a physical characteristic'..." (Devora Publishing Company: Jerusalem, 2004, p. 34).

3). The Jewish author Yair Davidy in his book The Tribes-Israelite Origins of Western Peoples: (Foreword by Rabbi A. Field) tells in much detail that the Saxon folks are Israel.

3). Jewish author Harry Golden wrote in 1967: “Isaiah the prophet wrote that the remnant of Yahweh’s people would be found in the Islands of the sea”. These Islands are shown to be North and West of Palestine, i.e. the United Kingdom.

4). Modern Jewish authorities who say, “Modern Jewry is Edom" (i.e., they descend from Esau, not Isaac).

Quoting from the modern Messianic Jewish writer John Fischer in his book, The Olive Tree Connection, we find:

Page 96: “The Jews of today are truly a people from many ethnic, cultural and racial backgrounds.”

Page 97: “Jewishness, however, consists of many elements: sociological, cultural, ethnic, religious, national, racial, historical, psychological and intellectual. The strength and mixture of these elements varies from person to person. This variety, therefore makes Jewishness elusive to define”.

Jewishness is elusive to define simply because “many” racial and ethnic backgrounds cannot be one singular racial and ethnic background at the same time. At the time of the gospels a similar situation existed. The reader might readily see the multi-racial situation with the modern Jew, but at the time of the first advent, this is not so obvious.

Mr. Fischer goes on to say:

These traditions were, and still are, a strong deceiving spiritual force. Traditions or religion do not specify race; traditions do not make any people the people of the Book. The Messiah had problems with the Jewish traditions and we will see that the spirit behind these traditions is one which enabled the Messiah to say some very disparaging things about the Jews in Judea that highlight both racial and belief factors.

Write Elizabeth Caldwell Hirschman and Donald N. Yates:

"To complicate matters...Jews who were born of two practicing Jewish parents, and who themselves belong to a Orthodox synagogue, may not necessarily be of Semitic ancestry. That is, they may not carry the genes of the ancient Hebrews. Instead, some time between 3,000 years ago and the present, their ancestors decided to BECOME Jews, and the family has continued to practice that faith ever since. Most Jews now living DO NOT have predominantly Semitic ancestry in their genetic makeup" (When Scotland Was Jewish: DNA Evidence, Archaeology, Analysis of Migrations, and Public and Family Records Show Twelfth Century Semitic Roots. McFarland & Co., Inc. Publishers: Jefferson, NC. 2007, p. 24).

The very title to this article might well astound those who have been brought up to believe that “the Jews” always means Israelites. One of the strange things about the words “Jew”, “Jews”, and “the Jews” as used today, is that these terms are not generalized in the Hebrew and Greek originals the way they are commonly used today.

According to the popular concept the words “Jew” is supposed to relate to Israel, or to all of YEHOVAH’s “chosen race” as a single entity. But, prophecy from Moses on gives separation between each tribe of Israel and also separation in destiny between the House of Israel and the House of Judah, right into the “last days”. Yet, somehow the churches can lump the tribes of Israel all together and call them “the Jews” together with any person of any race who calls himself a Jew.

Most Christians are also able to talk a lot of nonsense when it comes to the subject of Jews. At one time they can talk about a non-Israel “church” which is also supposed to have inherited the same promises that were made to Israel and at the same time talk about Jews being Israel. In effect Christians talk of two Israels. Also, we hear popular but nonsensical sayings such as “Abraham was the first Jew”. If “Jew” is supposed to relate to Judah, then Abraham descended from his own great-grandson, since he pre-dated the tribe of Judah by three generations. And, if Abraham was a Jew, then the Arabs who descended through Abraham’s son Ishmael would also have to be Jews as would all and every one of the many nations Abraham was father to. So, there is much misconception about the word “Jew”. In the Book of Revelation, the Messiah says that there are people who call themselves “Jews”, but who are not Jews in fact. Let us first work through this to try to find out who these false Jews are.

In the Old Testament

We find the words, "Yehuwdah" or "Yehuwdiy" used 813 times in the Old Testament and they are usually translated as Judah, but as “Jew” or “Jews” in the books of 1st Chronicles, Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah, Jeremiah and Daniel. In the remainder of the Old Testament, “Jews” usually refers to the remnant of the House or Tribe of Judah which returned to Palestine from Babylon. “Yehudah” simply means "Judah" and is the name of the patriarch Judah. It is used to refer to the tribe which stemmed from him. It is also used for the land or territory occupied by that people, and following the division of Israel after Solomon’s death, it was used for the House or Kingdom of Judah. This was the only term used in this way up to the time of the Babylonian captivity. Following their deportation into Babylon, another term was employed. This was "Yehudi" (plural "yehudim"). Originally this word meant an inhabitant of Judea, or the people who came from that country. As such it does not necessarily represent descendents of Judah, but can include any people of other races who resided there. It came also to represent any persons, irrespective of racial origin who embraced the Jewish religion, Judaism.

From Josephus' Antiquities, Book X1, V.7 we read,

By the time of the Messiah, this people had absorbed proselytes from many other sources. Particularly the nations of the Idumeans and Itureans were completely absorbed into Jewry, and made Judaism their religion. This explains the antagonism of the Jews towards the Messiah, and he made reference to their practice of encouraging proselytes into the nation.

The nation that formed in Palestine after the captivity of Judah in Babylon, was made up mainly of people from the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, together with some Levites. They settled in two regions, with Judah primarily in Judea and with Benjamin in Galilee, and internally they are referred to as Judeans and Galileans in the New Testament. The Judeans of the region of Judea came to include all the people living there, regardless of their racial origins. All these people are referred to by translators as “Jews”, because they were “of Judea”. But this does not mean “of Judah” only. Included in the population were many descendants of Esau (Edomites); these came to control the Temple, but these leaders were they of whom the Messiah said could not hear (and understand) his words.

This is agreed to by modern Jewish authorities:

Encyclopedia Judaica Vol. 10, p. 21: “From the division of Israel and Judah, the term Yehudi applied to all the residents of the Southern Kingdom, irrespective of tribal status”.

The word “Jews” did not apply to the Northern Kingdom. It never has!

IN THE NEW TESTAMENT, we have differing words rendered as Jews:

Ioudas, Strong's G2455: “of the descendants of Judah” (Hebrews 8:8 where it is a racial term).

loudas, Thayer: “Praised or celebrated...see Gen. 29:35 -- the tribe of Judah, the descendants of Judah”.

Ioudas is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew Yehudah. In the nine New Testament references it is rendered as Judah, Juda or Judas, always is reference to Judah, his descendants, or their country.

Ioudaios, Strong's G2453: “-- or belonging to Jehudah or of Judea (in the sense of “as a country”).

ioudaios, Thayer: “The word is also used of Christian converts from Judaism (Gal. 2:13) -- of Jewish Christians."

ioudaios, Vine: “It especially denotes the typical representatives of Jewish thought contrasted with believers in Christ”.

This, then, is more a matter of being a Jew by religion or region, rather than by race.

Ioudaios is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew Yehudi. It is translated as “Jew” and includes proselytes to Judaism. Thus we can see that the generalization of the word Jew cannot be sustained in Scripture. One Greek word tells of all the peoples occupying the land of that part of the covenant people, while the other tells of the covenant House of Judah in isolation. “Ioudaios” does not specifically refer to race at all, and usually refers to people who are not of the descendants of Judah. This does not mean to say that there were no “Ioudas” (Judahites) or members of other tribes amongst them. From all this we can see that Jew and Judah are not synonymous terms and that there is a sharp distinction between them. It follows that the name "Israel" should not be applied to the Jewish people as a whole, or the country that they occupy.

Historically, in the land of Judea, as well as Judahites there were Canaanites, Edomites, and others -- some of whom had become proselytes to the Jewish religion. As a consequence these were labeled “Jews” since they were “Jews” by religion and “Jews” because they lived in the land of Judea. But these were not of the descendants of Judah! The territorial term explains how Paul could be called a Jew. Paul was a Benjamite (Philippians 3:5). Paul and eleven of the disciples did not descend from the tribe of Judah.

To help with understanding here it must be pointed out that the word “Ioudaios” can cover a mixture of races which may include some of “Ioudas” -- both of which were in the territory of Judea. In the New Testament, the words translated as “the Jews” are used in a bad sense, whereas today they are commonly used in a good sense. The Messiah continually condemned “the Jews” (plural) as did the Apostle Paul. “The Jew” (singular) as used in Romans is used in a different sense. First of all then, we will consider the bad sense in which “the Jews” is usually used in Scripture.

IMPORTANT NOTE: This territorial term for “Jews” in Greek is in line with the United Nations and Race Relations Conventions, where the historic dictionary definition of “ethnic”, which essentially means, “peoples who are other than Christians or Jews”, has been changed. The re-interpretation now is made to refer to any group’s common or characteristic customs, culture, classification, traditions, beliefs, speech, descent, color, or ethnological division or national origin. In this context multi-racial Jews can thus now be claimed to be an ethnic group. “Anti-Semitic” now is made to refer to anything against the new concept of having this “Jewish” ethnic group.

In Judea, there were many races, and these could all be called “Jews” in the sense of being “Judeans” -- having this territory and/or a religious belief in common. Hence the phrase “the Jews” does not necessarily mean any common genetic origin such as physical descent from Abraham through Isaac. The Messiah, in the Book of John chapter eight, was talking to the Judean leadership in the treasury who historically were mainly of Edomite extraction, and hence this majority were not Israelites in the racial and Biblical meaning. “Israelite” is a genetic racial-tribal term throughout Scripture.

In this book, the word translated as “The Jews” and “Judeans” refers to the Judeans of any race in the territorial or religious sense, [not the racial sense] and this must be taken this way. It may not relate to Israel racially at all. The word “Judahite” is used in this book to refer to the House of Judah which is racial.

Revelation 2:9: “I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan....”

Revelation 3:9: “Behold, I will make them of the Synagogue of Satan, which say they are  Jews, and are not, but do lie...”

At face value, the translation is saying that there are people who say that they are Jews but who are not Jews in fact. The common acceptance of the word “Jew” says every Jew, regardless of race, is a good Jew, and that everyone who says that he is a Jew is a Jew. The Messiah is contradicting this. Let us go a little further and see some other things Yeshua says about “the Jews.”

Verse 21: “Ye shall seek Me, but SHALL DIE in your sins....”

This thought might upset some Christians who generalize everything and teach that “everyone who seeks will find” in the way they do. The “ye” is to the particular people being addressed. The Messiah says of these Jews that they “shall die” in their sins. So it does not include everyone in Judea. The “Jew” by race and the “Jew” by religious tradition may not be the same thing. We will again see that amongst the Judeans there was a racial mix, and that those of the Judahites could believe, whereas some of the non-Israel proselytes to Judaism could not believe (see v. 31).

Verse 21: “....Whither I go, ye CANNOT COME”.

The Messiah is saying that it is impossible for this portion of the Jews to go where he was going.

Verse 23: “Ye are FROM BENEATH”.

This is in contradistinction to “from above” in the same verse, or the term Christians usually but incorrectly refer to as “born again”. The Greek word reads “begotten from above”.

Verse 44: “Ye are of YOUR FATHER THE DEVIL”.

Verse 47: “Ye are NOT OF GOD”.

These are clear statements about who they are as not being “begotten from above”.

Verse 19: “Ye neither know me, nor my Father, if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.”

This matter of knowing and being known of YEHOVAH God has already been touched upon in another article.

“Oida” = know signifies primarily to have seen or perceived, or to know from observation.

Verse 37-9: “I know that ye are Abraham’s seed....If ye were Abraham’s children....”

Here the Messiah makes a distinction between Abraham’s seed and Abraham’s children. All of Abraham’s offspring were not heirs of the promises made to Abraham, but “in Isaac shall thy seed be called” -- these are the children.

Verse 43: “Why do ye not understand my speech?...because YE CANNOT HEAR MY WORD”.

Some might like to rationalize this away, but it has earlier been pointed out that only Israel can “hear” (hear and understand) YEHOVAH’s word. We have seen that the Word and the Law are stated in the Old Testament as given only to Israel of all the races on earth, as a covenant.

Verse 47: “He that is of God heareth God’s words. Ye therefore hear them not, because ye ARE NOT OF GOD”.

In these last two verses there is the word “hear”. Thayer’s Lexicon gives several meanings, among which we find:

1). To be endowed with the faculty of hearing (not deaf).

2). To attend to (use the faculty of hearing).

3). To understand, perceive the sense of what is being said.

The “cannot” and the “not of God” indicate that the Judeans Yeshua was addressing could physically hear but could not use the faculty of hearing. Going back a little to the Old Testament reference to the “edah” and the “cahal”, we find that only the “cahal” were to place their hands on the Levites -- (Numbers 8:9), and when the trumpets were sounded to move the Israelite camp, the whole “edah” heard these trumpets, but only the “cahal” were required to assemble to receive the instructions about moving on (Numbers 10:2).

Verse 55: “Yet ye have not known Him, but I know Him, and if I should say I know Him not, I shall be A LIAR LIKE UNTO YOU”.

The Messiah says here, as well as in Revelation 3:9, that the Jews were liars. Using the common acceptance of the word “Jew” we have to come to a decision about, “them which say they are Jews, but do lie” (Revelation 3:9). Do false “Jews” (as translated) exist, or not? Why should the churches continue to teach that “the Jews” must never be condemned because “they are God’s chosen race”? Did the Messiah condemn this section of the Judean nation, or not? This matter is of huge importance as a matter of doctrine. It has a great bearing on prophetic interpretation. It has a bearing upon what is going on in the State of Israel today. This is no minor doctrinal point! Incidentally, “the Jews” are never called YEHOVAH’s chosen people in the Bible!

John 10:26: “But ye believe not, because ye are NOT MY SHEEP, as I said unto you”.

The Messiah is here talking to the Jews in Judea. Is it not a peculiar thing that the churches teach that “the Jews” are YEHOVAH’s sheep and are YEHOVAH’s “natural” children? We have to decide if we are to agree with the Messiah or with Christian tradition. The popular indication is that “the Jews” were not sheep because they did not believe, but there is much more than that in this.

Matthew 23:15: “Ye compass land and sea to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the CHILD OF HELL than yourselves”.

For the Messiah to say that the Jews -- who held sway in the Temple -- were Children of Hell might be a bit much for most Christians to handle, but this is what the record shows. The Messiah does not say that all the descendants of Judah among the Judeans are Children of Hell, but he says that “the Jews” are. It is clear that the two cannot be the same people or that they were believing the same way. The inhabitants of Judea were a mixed bunch of races which included some of the descendants of Judah. The Messiah was not talking to that portion of the inhabitants of Judea who were the descendants of Judah, at this time. In the leadership of the nation, at that time, there was a minority of Judahites amongst the Edomites, and the Judahites did not hold the balance of power.

Matthew 21:41: “They say unto Him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out His vineyard unto other husbandmen...and when the chief priests and Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them”.

This is too telling to ignore. The wrong people were in charge of the vineyard! They were wicked and unbelieving.

In the Old Testament, in persons like Doeg the Edomite, and the Amalekite who killed King Saul, the influence of non-Israel in high places of the government of Israel can be seen. In the New Testament, likewise, non-Israel “leaders” in Israel also occupied positions of influence. Historically, the Herodians were a totally Edomite party. The descendants of Herod Antipater “the Idumean”, and how they took control of the Sanhedrin is detailed in the Encyclopedia Judaica, 1971: 8/376-390. They were not only non-Israel, but were people “against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever” (Malachi 1:2-4). Since Edom and “the Jews” are so intimately connected, how can the churches preach that “the Jews” always means “Israel”?

Whence the Tares?

Matthew 15:13: “Every plant which My Heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up...”

So, there are those in the field who are not planted by our Heavenly Father! This is not commonly believed.

Matthew 19:11-12: “All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given...he that is able to receive it, let him receive it...”

Everyone cannot receive the Messiah’s sayings! This is contrary to the popular teachings!

In the parable of the sower and the seed Yeshua explained:

Matthew 13:38: “The field is the world, the good seed are the Children of the Kingdom, but the tares are the children of the wicked one...”

The religious churches might not like to think that there are people on earth who are classified as tares. There are two plantings of differing kinds, in the “field”. A “tare” cannot hear or believe. Paul confirms this when he talks about “vessels fitted for destruction” (Romans 9:23).

The Messiah is confirming that every plant is not planted by his Heavenly Father. The Messiah says that it is the enemy who plants the tares. Yeshua also makes it very clear that “every plant, which my heavenly father hath not planted, shall be rooted up” (Matthew 15:13). So, it is very clear that there are two kinds of people, one “from above”, and one “from below”, in the vineyard. It must still be so today in the world since the two kinds continue to grow together until the harvest. This harvest is at the end of the age; so it is yet to happen. The churches will never allow this separation of kinds in their teachings and they include everyone as being able to receive the Word. The prophets and the Messiah agree that the Word was given to Israel alone. That is why the Messiah said to Nicodemus that it was necessary to be “begotten from above” to be able to perceive the Kingdom of YEHOVAH God. (The Greek “anothen” erroneously rendered as “born again” in the traditional teaching).

The problem in doctrine is to determine whether a tare originates from having a biological beginning or whether it is only a matter of belief. The answer is that both factors are involved. Esau rejected his birthright and founded a line of “sperma” or seed which was not intrinsically good seed. Although tares are not said in Scripture to be “seed”, they are sown in the field in the same way the good seed were, although they may not have been sown at the same time. The two were different in their character. The “sperma” is used in Scripture to identify groupings and separate one group from another. Esau founded a dynasty through rejection of the birthright he was in line for.

YEHOVAH God calls Esau “the border of wickedness and the people against whom the LORD has indignation for ever”. In Malachi 1:4: both the words border=“gebawl” and people =“‘am” show that the word "Esau" represents a people. Since Jacob and Esau had the same biological parents, with wheat representing Jacob and tares representing Esau, we can see why tares and wheat are difficult to separate by appearance as they are sprouting up. Both are sown in one field. (Note that a field where the sowing was done was an enclosed area only of the whole earth). It is at the time of bearing fruit that a physical separation is to be made.

Some of the Judeans were tares and could never be anything else. A tare cannot turn into a wheat plant but both must grow together unto the harvest when the tares are FIRST gathered and set aside for burning. The church denominations partly recognize that the tares come from those who have turned away from YEHOVAH God. Like Esau, who could not find repentance, the tare cannot find repentance (2 Peter 2:15-22; Hebrews 10:26-29; Hebrews 12:16, 17). Among the Judeans were descendants of Esau who had an inherited unbelief problem. These descendants are known as Edomites and although they are of the same biological line as Abraham and Isaac, we are told that they are two “nations” and two “manner of people” (Genesis 25:23).

YEHOVAH God says that He hates Edom and that Edom will be destroyed before the time of the harvest. The Messiah said about them:

Luke 13:24-30: “For many, I say unto you will seek to enter and shall not be able...then shall ye say, ‘We have eaten and drunk in your presence, and thou hast taught in our streets’ Then he shall say, I tell you I know not whence ye are, depart from me”.

It will be shown how some of Edom have become “Jews”, and we have seen that some of the Judeans were not Israelites, although they did descend from Abraham. The Messiah told them that much in John 8:37 when he said “I know that you are Abraham’s seed (“sperma”), but you are NOT ABRAHAM’S CHILDREN” (“teknon”). The inheritance continues on from Isaac through Jacob, not Esau. Esau is not Jacob who was renamed Israel.

Who were these people against whom the Messiah spoke so vehemently? Who were these people the Apostle Paul declared were “contrary (or antagonistic) to all men”? (1 Thessalonians 2:15). Let us explore the connection between “the Jews” and Esau. (Note: There are Jews from other origins).

Malachi 1:2-4: “Was not Esau Jacob’s brother” saith the LORD, “Yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau...and they shall call them the “border of wickedness and the people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever”.

Romans 9:13: “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated”.

Hebrews 12:16: “Lest there be any fornicator or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright, for ye know that afterwards, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears”.

It is contrary to popular evangelical thought to say that one can reject his birthright and not to be able to find it again. Esau knew what he was doing, and despised what YEHOVAH God had to offer him. This is why YEHOVAH hated him. Esau “sold” his birthright. He did not just backslide! But Scripture teaches that the LORD has indignation against Esau for ever (Malachi 1:4). There is a whole line of prophecy against Esau’s descendants which seems to be studiously avoided today. This is because of the concept that the modern State of Israel represents the beginning of the re-gathering of Israel. And so every reference to anyone else being re-gathered to Jerusalem to be burned there must be hidden. It is time that this was uncovered!

In Scripture, the descendants of Esau are also presented by some other names.

1). Genesis 36:8: “Esau is Edom”.

2). Genesis 36:9: “The father (or pro-genitor) of the Edomites”.

3). Genesis 36:43: “Esau is the father of the Edomites”.

4). Deuteronomy 2:5: “I have given Mount Seir to Esau”.

5). Ezekiel 35:15: "Idumea (or Idumaea)...."

6). Jeremiah 49:13: "Amos 1:12 Bozrah and Teman."

7). Jeremiah 48:8: "Dedan."

8). Isaiah 21:1-12: "Dumah (abbreviated form of Idumea)."

They are also known as Temanites, Amalakites, and other descendants of the twelve Dukes of Edom (Genesis 36:11-42). It may include the Horites amongst whom Edom settled in Seir. Job’s comforters were Temanites and from this we can see their religious bent, but they did not speak that which was right, as did Job (Job 42:7). Here we find many names where we can look for prophecy about the descendants of Esau. Before we do so, let us look at Esau a little further.

Esau married the daughter of Ishmael, a Hittite, and other Canaanites. His sons married Canaanites. This is a further reason for isolating all his descendants. Israel was later told to exterminate the Canaanites before taking the “Holy Land” as an inheritance. The consequences to Israel of mixed marriage with the Canaanites was known, but it did not stop Esau. This is one of the reasons why YEHOVAH God cut him off. The Canaanites were not to enter the congregation of the LORD for all generations, and even if Israel did not finish this task of destroying the Canaanites, they will yet be destroyed. They cannot be converted. Try telling the churches today that there is a family of people who cannot be converted. The “all the world” doctrinal interpretation prevents understanding. The churches refuse to believe Zechariah who says that after the re-gathering of Israel, “there shall no more be the Canaanite in the House of the LORD of Hosts” (Zechariah 14:21). We will shortly look at the destiny of Edomite-Jewry.

In Genesis 27:40-41, YEHOVAH said that Esau was destined to serve his brother and Esau hated Jacob because of this. Esau has been against Jacob ever since. But here Isaac prophesied of Esau that he would break Jacob’s service and take the dominion. So Biblically, and historically, the Edomites became the outward religious rulers of the inheritance (the birthright land). This possibly applies to the “church” scene today because those controlling doctrinal issues have taken the dominion in the same way. These are the Nicolaitanes the Messiah says he hates with intense hatred (Revelation 2:15).

King David conquered Mount Seir and the Edomites and compelled them to obey the Mosaic Law. It was later, after the captivity and under the guise of the new Jewish religion that the Edomites took dominion in “the land” and they became “the rulers of the Jews” over a period of time. Throughout the New Testament they are referred to as Jews -- but never are they spoken of as being the descendants of Judah.

So, let us see some things that the modern Jews themselves have to say:

Encyclopaedia Judaica Vol. 6, p. 376 (1971): “David made Edom into an Israelite province ruled by appointed governors.” 2 Sam 8:14 -- ”And all they of Edom became David’s servants”.

The Jewish Encyclopaedia Vol. 5, p. 41 (1904): The Edomites “were incorporated into the Jewish nation, and their country was called by the Greeks and Romans ‘Idumea’ (Mark 3:8)”.

The Encyclopaedia Judaica Vol. 6, p. 378: “John Hyrcanus conquered the whole of Edom, and undertook the forced conversion of its inhabitants to Judaism”.

These quotes show that the authors of these articles in the encyclopedia saw the Edomites as being different from the Israelites at that time. The Judeans became a racial mixture. Today the modern Jew does not admit to having any part of descent from Edom outwardly, but we will be looking at statements from Jewish authorities that say, “modern Jewry is Edom”.

These presentations do not demonstrate how Edom gained control over the nation or Temple or how much mixing of races followed on, but Mark 3:8 says that the multitude that followed the Messiah came from Galilee, Judea, from Idumea, beyond Jordan and Tyre and Sidon. This indicates the level of integration at that time.

Josephus and His Comments On “the Jews”

(Quotations are from the 1993 printing of the New Updated Version by William Whiston).

The historian Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews, 9/1) tells of the Idumeans (Edom) submitting “to the use of circumcision and the rest of the Jewish ways of living at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews”.

The translator’s note (a) says:

In the same section we see record of the grammarian Ammonius, who says, in the year 129:

In The Wars of the Jews (4:4.4) the general of the Idumean army gives an appellation to Jerusalem as being the “common city” to their own nation. This is confirmed in Wars 2:20.3 where a summary is given by the translator:

Also:

Wars 6:8.2: “At the time when Titus attacked Jerusalem, the Idumeans were the chief defenders of Jerusalem”.

In Antiq 15:7.9: Josephus tells how an Idumean priest named Costobarus received Jewish law and custom, became governor of Idumea, and then married Salome, Herod’s sister. Antipater, “the Idumean” was Herod’s father!

Then Josephus gives examples of other races being circumcised to receive the Jewish religion, and this includes royalty (e.g. Queen Helena of Adiabene and her son King Izates -- Antiq 20:21-5).

Wars 7:3.3: “They also made proselytes of a great many of the Greeks perpetually, and thereby, after sort, brought them to be a portion of their own body”.

The racial mixture of the Judeans as containing Israelites and non-Israelites is shown by the following:

Wars 2:82: “For there are three philosophical sects among the Jews. The followers of the first of whom are the Pharisees; of the second the Sadducees; and the third sect, who pretends to a severer discipline, and called Essenes. These last are Jews by birth, and seem to have a greater affection for one another than the other sects have”.

It would seem that Josephus is indicating that the Essenes were Israelites and the Pharisees and Sadducees were not.

Elsewhere, Josephus refers to Idumeans as Syrians. He calls Doeg the Edomite a Syrian (Antiq 6:12.4). Wars 6:2.1 indicates that the common language of the Jews in Judea at that time was a Syriac dialect. The “Syrian” factor is another subject.

Hyrcanus’s son, Aristbulus,

Iturea was North-West of Palestine and this quotation is made to show that peoples becoming subject to Jewish laws and thus becoming known as “Jews” came from lands both North and South of Palestine. Becoming “Jews” does not make all of them into Israelites or descendants from Isaac by race.

A further note says, “that country is also called Judea, and the people Jews, and this name is given also to as many others as embrace their religion”. This is an important summation!

In these historical records we can see important facts:

1). That the descendants of Esau (Edomites or Idumeans as well as many others) became known as “Jews”.

2). That “Jews” (by religion), many of whom were not of Israel stock, and included the descendants of Esau, existed both inside and outside of Judea, in those times. Even today we do not know the proportions!

3). That the words “Jew”, “Jews” and “Judeans” did not then equate solely with Judah or with Israel, by race, any more than they do today.

The control of Judea by Edom started at the time of the captivity of Judah, and the Edomite aristocracy eventually gained ascendancy over the returnees from Babylon. From this position of power they set about expanding their territory and power base by compelling all and sundry to follow their system of political and religious power.

Who Killed the Messiah?

Contrary to popular opinion, the execution of the Messiah in 31 A.D. was carried out in a "Jewish" fashion -- down to the most minute details! Writes Nancy L. Kuehl:

"That the execution was a Jewish affair, we have written verification in Acts 4:9, where the RULERS OF ISRAEL [the Sanhedrin] are confronted with the execution of Jesus. There is just no getting around the fact that the ENTIRE PROCESS was a Jewish affair from beginning to end, and it is the ONLY conclusion we can draw from the Talmudic writings, which speak NOTHING of the Romans" (A Book of Evidence: The Trials and Execution of Jesus. Resource Publications: Eugene OR, 2013, p. 71).

We find proof of this in the Babylonian Talmud, notice!

"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu [the Messiah] was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy...he was hanged on the eve of the Passover! [Nisan 14]" (b. Sanh. 43a).

The above passage -- and others -- was written by "Jews"! "There is no reason," argues Nancy Kuehl, "for them to have contrived such 'fantasies' concerning Israel's involvement in the arrest and execution of Jesus, especially in light of the tendency toward anti-Semitic persecution of Jesus by the universal [Catholic] church of the latter first century and onward. Quite simply, the arrest (and execution) was ENTIRELY a Jewish affair. There is little doubt that both Herod (as reigning royal ruler) and the Sanhedrin (the legislative body of Israel) had already identified Jesus as a wanted man and were only awaiting their opportunity to seize him in Jerusalem" (A Book of Evidence, p. 72).

So who, exactly, was responsible for the Messiah's death?

Justin -- an early "Christian" writer who was a Semite by birth -- wrote in his Apology (between 148 and 154 A.D.) that the SANHEDRIN was responsible for the Messiah's death (see Bush, Classical Readings, p. 21; "The First Apology of Justin").

Also, we have further confirmation from Tertullian (160-230 A.D.) that the execution of the Messiah was carried out by the SANHEDRIN -- NOT Pilate! (ibid., pp. 93-94).

All the earliest documents show, without a doubt, that the Sanhedrin was responsible for crucifying the Messiah. Think about it -- if the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate wanted the Messiah put to death in the Roman fashion -- then there would have been absolutely NO REASON for him to hand the Messiah over to the Sanhedrin! The apostle John clearly makes this point when he records the following:

"Pilate said to them, 'Shall I crucify your King?' The chief priests [of the Sanhedrin] answered, 'We have no king but Caesar!' So he [Pilate] delivered him [the Messiah] to them [the Sanhedrin] to be crucified. So they [the Sanhedrin] took Jesus and led him away" (John 19:15-16).

Luke concurs in 24:20 --

"...and how the chief priests and OUR RULERS delivered him [the Messiah] to be condemned to death, and crucified him."

Notes Nancy Kuehl, "Although Pilate had  sent a representation of Roman soldiers to be present at the execution, it was NOT these soldiers who hanged him on the tree: it was the Temple captains" (A Book of Evidence, p. 150).

Now that we have established that the Sanhedrin and the Temple authorities were directly responsible for the execution of the Messiah, and NOT the Romans as people have assumed, what do we know about the Sanhedrin and the rulers of Judea at that time? Nancy Kuehl elaborates --

"The Herodian Dynasty which had ruled over Judea was founded by Herod the Great, AN IDUMEAN, said to be of Jewish blood but in reality only a proselyte to Judaism. Politically, his allegiance was to Antony and Cleopatra and, later, to Augustus who conferred upon him the title of king. It was through Roman military aid that Herod had solidified his position in Judea by defeating the Jewish Hasmonean kings....He knew little of Jewish culture nor religion....It was Herod who instituted the Hellenic Babylonian-Alexandrian priesthood in Judea. These priests were especially composed of the families of Boethus (to a lesser extent) and Phiabi, who became his political allies. He appointed as the first high priest one Hanamel, A BABYLONIAN....The Hellenistic and Babylonian influence upon the Jewish priesthood would forever change Judaism. These individuals were known to have demonstrated the views, political, religious, and economic, of their crafty monarch. Together, the Herodians and the Priesthood, became the aristocratic ruling class in Judea, reflecting Roman politics and Greek culture and learning so prominent in the PAGAN SOCIETIES surrounding Judea" (ibid., pp. 133-134).

We have seen that the Herodian Dynasty was Idumean to the core. What about the priestly families of Boethus and Phiabi? Since we have sketchy information regarding the origins of these families we cannot say with certainty they were of Edomite or Idumean ancestry, however, they certainly were NOT descended from Judah the son of Jacob -- or any other of the twelve tribes of Israel! We find proof of this in the Talmud -- Tractate Sanhedrin. This tractate deals with the composition and procedures of the courts that administered Jewish law. The GREAT SANHEDRIN consisted of seventy-one ordained scholars who served as judges -- and it met in the chamber of Hewn Stone in Jerusalem. This court of seventy-one was a kind of appellate court, and it also dealt with special cases, such as trying a High Priest or a whole city accused of idolatry.

The LESSER SANHEDRIN consisted of twenty-three judges, and it met both in Jerusalem and in other parts of the country. This court DEALT WITH CRIMINAL CASES and was competent to INFLICT THE DEATH PENALTY. There were also minor courts of three members -- which are referred to by the general term beth din. The court of three dealt with monetary matters.

More details on the different courts within the first-century Judean judicial system is provided by Nancy Kuehl:

"There were, during the time of Jesus, three Sanhedrins:

1) a three-judge panel;
2) a twenty-three-member judicial Sanhedrin; and
3) a full seventy-one-member religious Sanhedrin.

"ONLY the twenty-three-member Sanhedrin was qualified to try criminal cases. Individuals accused of capital crimes were brought before this court over which the nasi and ab bet din presided. At the time of Jesus the Sadducees held the powerful offices of the criminal court....The Great Sanhedrin (sometimes called the Great Beth Din) was a tribunal body consisting of three chambers: the Chamber of the Chief Priests; the Chamber of the Scribes; and the CHAMBER OF THE ELDERS (sometimes called counselors). These three chambers were divided into twenty-three members each, which when combined constituted a body of sixty-nine members. Added to this were the two high priests: the nasi and the ab bet din, making a total of seventy-one members in all. This legislative unit was responsible ONLY for the administration of the Temple" (A Book of Evidence, pp. 99-100).

Now the CHAMBER OF THE ELDERS (who were also called "senators" of "councilors" ) were men of aristocratic lineage who held the view that the nation should faithfully follow the written law of Moses. This was the more conservative group in which the Messiah was accepted as hasidim. According to Nancy Kuehl, "The conservative Pharisees with whom Jesus was congenial generally associated themselves with the CHAMBER OF THE ELDERS. This is the reason that Jesus sometimes is found dining with, conversing with, and visiting with some Pharisees. It was to this conservative group that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimaethea belonged. Unfortunately, this chamber was the LEST influential of the three chambers and had nothing to do with criminal law" (ibid., p. 102).

According to S. Srinivasa Aiyar, in his work The Legality of the Trial of Jesus, "in order for one to apply for membership in this elite political and religious governing assemblage that person must have been A HEBREW and A LINEAL DESCENDANT OF HEBREWS"! (New Orleans LA: Chas. E. George, 1914, p. 49).

The very fact that this was stressed for those applying for membership in the Chamber of the Elders (which was one of the three chambers of the Great Sanhedrin) infers that the other chambers and courts -- including the twenty-three-member Lesser Sanhedrin than dealt with criminal cases -- were NOT staffed by lineal descendants of the Children of Israel! It is evident that the Lesser Sanhedrin consisted of a mixture of Idumeans, Canaanites, Babylonians and sundry other non-Israelites in its membership. This was the group that condemned and killed the Messiah! Those who were actually descended from Judah had nothing to do with this nefarious act!

This will be new ground for most readers so please read the Scriptures below carefully word for word. There is much detail and identification in them. Esau sold his birthright, but the Scriptures tell us that Edom would try to regain the sold inheritance (the Land) in the last days. This will be done by them as “the Jews”. Peoples purporting to be Jews will return to the Holy Land, but they will be a racial mixture containing the offspring from Esau’s mixed marriages, and through Esau’s religion. The Messiah continually condemned this religion and pronounced woe upon woe upon the teachers of this Jewish religion. There certainly is no reason to suspect that this might have changed in the present day. The Messiah said of them, “Bring them hither (to Jerusalem) that I might destroy them” (Luke 19:27). It has to be questioned who is returning and is being “brought hither” to the State of Israel today, and why.

Malachi 1:4: “Whereas Edom says, we are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places. thus saith the LORD of hosts, they shall build, but I will throw down”.

Ezekiel 33:24: “Those that inhabit the waste of the land of Israel speak saying, Abraham was one but we are many, the land was given us for an inheritance”.

Note the “one” and “many” because this will come up again. Here we see what Edom says, and below we see what YEHOVAH God also says about this.

Ezekiel 35:10-15: “Because thou hast said, these two nations (i.e., Israel and Judah) and these two countries shall be mine, and we will possess it....and thou shalt know that I am the LORD that hast heard all thy blasphemies which thou hast spoken against the mountains of Israel saying, they are desolate...they are given us to consume....as thou didst rejoice at the inheritance of the house of Israel because it was desolate, so will I do unto thee. Thou shalt be desolate O Mount Seir and all Idumea, even all of it, and they shall know that I am the LORD”.

Ezekiel 36:1-7: “Because the enemy has said against you, aha, even the ancient high places are ours in possession. Therefore thus saith the LORD God; ‘surely in the fire of my jealousy have I spoken against the residue of the heathen, and against all Idumea which have appointed my land into their possession with the joy of all their heart, with despiteful minds, to cast it out for a prey'”.

Obadiah 8-9: “Shall not I in that day, saith the LORD, even destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of the mount Esau, and thy mighty men, O Teman, shall be dismayed , to the end that every one of the mount of Esau may be cut off by slaughter”.

Obadiah 13: “They laid hands on the substance of Jacob and Judah, but they shall be judged, and the kingdom shall be the LORD’s”.

Isaiah 34:5: “For my sword shall be bathed in heaven: behold it shall come down upon Idumea (Edom), and upon the people of my curse, to judgment”.

Habakkuk 3:3: “God came from Teman....his glory covered the heavens, and the earth was full of his praise..”

These Scriptures also give the timing when this is to happen. It is the end of this age when the stars fall from heaven, and the judgment here is against Idumea who is occupying “the Land”. “FOR IT IS THE DAY OF THE LORD’S VENGEANCE AND THE YEAR OF RECOMPENSES FOR THE CONTROVERSY OF ZION.”

Even today, there is this controversy about who should be in possession and control of the Holy Land. Should it be Judah in Judea and Jerusalem, or should it be Esau’s mixed descendants? Today the Pope is seeking control of the holy places and the Papacy has never renounced its false claim as King of Jerusalem. The prophecy in this article alone is not pretty. Like so many other Scriptures, the picture is of a land becoming devoid of grass, birds and even fish. There has never at any time in history been such a judgment upon the Holy Land. But YEHOVAH’s nation will return to a cleansed land, and will dwell secure without any enemies at all after all this destruction and cleansing by fire. Some might like to say that the grass, birds, fish and the fire are symbols, but they do not appear to be so. “Esh” is used of literal fire. This is to happen at Jerusalem! This is not the present situation in the State of Israel with a return to a land totally cleansed by fire happening first!

Amos 1:10-12: “But I will send a fire upon Teman, which shall devour the palaces of Bozrah”.

This judgment upon Edom is the consequence of Esau’s anger which “Did tear perpetually against Jacob and for Edom’s wrath which he kept”. The destruction of Edom in prophecy is always by burning.

Isaiah 63:1-6: “Who is this that cometh from Edom with dyed garments from Bozrah, this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength...for the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of My redeemed has come...and I will tread the people down in my anger.”

Jeremiah 49:7-22: “Concerning Edom...for I will bring the calamity of Esau upon him the time that I will visit him...but I have made Edom bare...he shall not be able to hide himself”.

Edom is certainly hiding himself now and is an impostor in the Holy Land. Any serious study of the “re-gathering of Israel” will show that the timing factors are ignored in the majority of the books found in Christian bookshops. Edom does not seem to exist in all the popular books on prophecy that relate to end-time events. Neither does the time and the place of Edom’s destruction ever get a mention. If there is one major reason for this, it is because Edom is hiding himself as the latter Scripture says, and from his hidden position he promotes what must be a lie in saying that “the Jews” and Israel are one and the same people. This goes on to influence much New Testament doctrine and what is taught in the "Christian" denominations today.

In the New Testament, much about this matter can be found in the parables of the Messiah, but this study would take a special article. When the Messiah spoke in parables against the Scribes and Pharisees, “they perceived that He spake of them” (Matthew 21:45). They were to be “cast out into outer darkness” (Matthew 8:12). They could not bring forth good fruit because it was impossible for them to do so. They were destined to be hewn down and cast into the fire. They were “the Children of the Wicked One” (see John 8:44).

The Edomites were occupying the vineyard, but when the Lord of the vineyard comes “he will miserably destroy those ‘wicked’ men”. The word “wicked” is definitive (Matthew 21:41 where the Pharisees perceived Yeshua spoke of them).

Proverbs 16:4: “The LORD has made all things for Himself; yes, even the wicked for the day of evil”.

Psalm 58:3-4: “The wicked are estranged from the womb. They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies”.

These wicked were born that way. They have a destiny.

The word “Edom” or “Esau”, as used in both Hebrew and Greek, refers to the descendants of Esau as a racial group.

Hebrews 12:16, 17: “Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat, sold his birthright, for ye know that afterward, when he would have received the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears”.

Esau was a fornicator. He married “different” or outside his own bloodline. Esau cannot find repentance -- even if sought with tears. Esau was profane. He had crossed a threshold according to the meaning of this word. Now, remember how Yeshua said this of certain of the Judeans in John 8:21 that they could not go where he was going. The descendants of Esau must exist today. Esau cannot find repentance, even with tears, right up to today apart from one provision YEHOVAH God has made. The children of Edom may enter the congregation of Israel three generations after marriage with an Israelite (Deuteronomy 23:7-8). Debate about whether or not this is genetic or by belief will not alter the fact about it being so. Now this is very contrary to popular teaching and the “all the world” teaching. What is quoted above is a New Testament quotation!

Identification of “the Jews” with Edom is found in many places, and indeed in places where it might be least expected. Few would expect this statement -- ”EDOM IS MODERN JEWRY” -- in the Jewish Encyclopaedia!

1). See New Standard Jewish Encyclopaedia, (1977) page 586.

2). See Jewish Encyclopaedia (1904), page 41.

3). See Jewish Encyclopaedia (1925), Book 13:5/41. This encyclopedia claims that today Edom is modern Jewry but it also speaks about Jew and Edomite as being separate entities.

4). Encyclopaedia Biblica...Says the same thing (Vol. 2, col. 1187).

5). Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews. This historian, a Roman General, who recorded the events of that period says: “The Jews are a people, distinct and separate from God’s people, although living among them”.

These are the sort of things that are not told by the popular schools of prophecy, because they do not fit in with the “all the world” doctrine. But even the Jewish Encyclopaedia says modern Jewry is Edom!

Let us look at this from another angle. Edom has always been very religious and has opposed Israel. Even from the time the Children of Israel were on their way to inherit the promised land, Edom came out to prevent the passage of the Children of Israel.

Numbers 20:18-21: “And Edom came out against him with much people, and with a strong hand. Thus Edom refused to give Israel passage through his border.”

Has anything changed? Who are among the main enemies of Biblical Christianity in the West today? Who was the Messiah continually up against when he walked the Holy Land? It was always “the Jews”. The Pharisees and Sadducees were at odds over teachings, but they were united against the Messiah.

6). Encyclopaedia Judaica (Vol. 6 (1971)): “John Hyrcanus conquered the whole of Edom and undertook the forced conversion of its inhabitants to Judaism (Josephus, Ant. X111: 9:1)”.

The same account can be found in The New Standard Jewish Encyclopaedia (1977), page 589: “Thenceforth the Edomites became a section of the Jewish people”. These “Jewish people” then were not Israelites and cannot be Israelites today.

7). Encyclopaedia Judaica 1971 Vol. 6, p. 370: “Bozra is Edom” and then quotes Genesis 36:1 “Esau which is Edom”, and then points out that Esau married a Canaanite/Hittite (Genesis 36:1 and 36:2), and also an Ishmaelite (Genesis 28:9) and Hivites (Genesis 36:2-3).

8). Encyclopaedia Judaica Vol. 6, p. 378 (1971): “Edom is frequently mentioned in Latin Poems of the period, usually as a synonym for Judea”. Also, Edom appears sometimes in the Aggadah referring to actual Edomites, and sometimes to the Romans who are identified with them”. “After the death of Herod in 4 BC [actually, 1 B.C.], Edom was included with Judea and Samaria in the Ethnarchy of Archelaus -- Edom became part of the Roman province of Judea”. Thus Edomites and Judeans became affiliated.

9). In the next column we find, “The overwhelming majority of homilies about Edom speak explicitly of Rome”. Thus it is stated that Rome was founded by the children of Esau. The continuing attack of Edom against true Israel (not the State of Israel) comes also through Rome.

10). Encyclopaedia Judaica Vol. 6, p. 857 (1971): “In the Aggadah, Esau is discussed -- as identical with Edom, and sometimes with Rome with whom Edom was identified”.

The “Dukes of Edom” is translated from “Alluph” which is the name used of the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the State of Israel today. “Alluph” is used in Scripture 57 times referring to the leaders of Edom and sometimes this refers to the “governors of Judah” thus indicating the governors of Judah were Edomites. Gesenius indicates “especially used of the leaders of the Edomites”

So, in all this list we find identification of Edom as being “Jews”. This connects with modern Jewry.

But, few Christian denominations will allow this.

Jewishness today is primarily related to Edom according to these Jewish sources, but it can be a matter of religion and upbringing. Jews also come from Ham and Japheth. Thus, these cannot all be from Shem, and those not from Shem cannot be from the Tribe or House of Judah or be Israelites.

Encyclopedia Judaica Vol. 6, p. 143 (1971): “The history of the Falashas [Ethiopian Jews] speaks of their Hamitic origin”.

Thus these are not Semitic! It is suggested in this source that they may have come from the marriage of Solomon’s son, Menelik, to the Queen of Sheba.

There is proof that the Eastern European Jew originated from Japheth, and NOT from Shem. As this is so, then this part of modern Jewry is dominated by a non-Semitic people. They could not then possibly be Israelites. The two major groups in modern Jewry are the Ashkenazim (i.e., Eastern) and the Sephardic (i.e., Western) Jew -- but anthropologically they are clearly not the same race! So both could not be who they claim to be if they both claim to be Israel and of the same race.

There are United Nations papers concerning this matter, and one of their researchers, Raphail Patai declares,

“The findings of physical anatomy show that, contrary to popular view, there is no Jewish race (i.e., that among those who call themselves Jews). Documentation suggests that Jews living in one culture are similar anthropologically to the culture in which they live, rather than all being similar to each other in differing cultures”.

This quotation is from the well documented book, The Thirteenth Tribe, by Arthur Keostler. Keostler offers proof that the Eastern European Jew is descended from the large Khazar Kingdom which existed in Russia in the early centuries. The Khazars adopted Judaism as the State religion prior to the eighth century, as a political move to create a buffer between Muslims on one side and “Christians” on the other. Documents and correspondence from that period are still available from as far away as Spain and Egypt. One important fact is that the Khazar people themselves claimed descent from Japheth. They were not Semites so they did not descend from Abraham! Yet they are known today as being “Jews” and to speak against them is falsely said to be anti-Semitic! Recent Russian and Polish archaeological investigations are said to confirm the Khazar/Polish-Jew connection.

It is common for certain traditionalists and Jews to declare that it was only the Khazar leaders who adopted Judaism, but records indicate that the state religion was enforced on all the Khazar people. Encyclopedia Judaica Vol. 10, p. 944 (1971) says,

The Jewish Encyclopaedia Vol. 4, p. 1 (1905) under “CHAZARS”:

The historian H. G. Wells in The Outline of History p. 494: says,

History details the fall of the Khazar empire and how they were driven Westward towards Poland, the Baltic States and Western Russia. There were pockets of Israelites in Europe prior to the Ashkenazim invasion, but they were a different people.

Mr. Keostler says that all the facts about the Jews being one people “looks like the most cruel hoax which history has ever perpetrated”.

Since the advent of DNA testing some interesting facts have emerged regarding the genetic makeup of so-called Levites from amongst the Ashkenazi Jews. Writes David B. Goldstein in Jacob's Legacy: A Genetic View of Jewish History:

"The Ashkenazi Levites...have a very high frequency of a particular collection of Y-chromosome markers (a haplogroup called 'R-M17') that is RARE in Jewish populations and generally rare or absent altogether in populations of the Near East. Where did these Y chromosomes come from?....Since R-M17 is not common among current Jewish groups or, presumably, among the ancient Hebrews, how did it come to be in such high frequency in the Ashkenazi Levites?" (Yale University Press: New Haven & London, 2008, pp. 65-70).

This is a very good question -- one which the author himself answers in the following pages of his book:

"Our data suggests that the R-M17 chromosomes appeared among the Ashkenazi Levites approximately A THOUSAND YEARS AGO. Historically, such a date would appear to coincide with the consolidation and expansion of the Ashkenazi community....Somewhere in central Asia, perhaps near the modern nation of Mongolia, more than two thousand years ago, a group or groups of nomadic tribes with a rigid and characteristic social organization developed exceptional skills as horsemen. The TURKS became mercenaries for various Asian overlords and, following their masters throughout Asia, reached as far west as modern Bulgaria in the first centuries C.E." (ibid., p. 71).

Continued Goldstein --

"Among the Turkic powers to emerge were the KHAZARS, who until 630 C.E. were part of the western Turkish Empire....After that empire's collapse, the Khazars established a Central Asian empire of their own along the Caspian Sea that converted to Judaism in the ninth century C.E. Although we do not know how much of the general population of Khazaria may have converted, correspondence between Khazaria and Jewish officials in Moorish Spain records Judaism as the STATE RELIGION of Khazaria. From the tenth century on, the major Khazar Jewish documents were written in Hebrew....In its time, Khazaria fought the Arabs to the south, maintained friendly relations with Byzantium, and corresponded with the Jewish chief minister of the Cordoba caliphate in Muslim Spain. Eventually, however, Khazaria succumbed to the expanding Slavic peoples. In 1016, Khazaria fell to the new Viking nation of Kievan Rus" (ibid., pp. 71-72).

David Goldstein now articulates some serious doubts he has regarding the genetic makeup of the Ashkenazi Levites:

"The Khazar Empire stood to the east of the Ashkenazi Jews, between the Dnieper and Volga rivers, and reached south into the modern nation of Georgia. Critically, although Khazaria was established by Central Asian Turkic-speaking peoples, it encompassed the Slavic heartland. The citizens of the empire, therefore, were most probably Slavic and no doubt rich in R-M17. Could Khazaria, I wonder to this day, be the source of Ashkenazi Levite R-M17 Y chromosomes?....The Khazar connection seems no more far-fetched than the spectacular continuity of the Cohen line or the apparent presence of Jewish genetic signatures in a South African Bantu people. And then there is that troubling Y chromosome that is so common in the Ashkenazi Levites but seemingly nowhere else to be found. I can not claim the evidence proves a Khazaria connection. But it does raise the possibility, and I confess that, although I can not prove it yet, the idea does now seem to me plausible, if not likely" (ibid., pp. 72-74).

Dr. Eran Elhaik is a world-class geneticist at Johns Hopkins Medical Center. His research into Jewish origins has produced a similar earth-shaking thesis. He solidly agrees with Koestler that the majority of Jews today can claim no ancestry to Abraham. They’re primarily descendants of the Khazars. Not since Koestler in 1976 has an academic so successfully challenged accepted “facts” about the beginnings of modern Eastern European (“Ashkenazi”) Jewry.