The Hebrew-Celtic Connection
Posts : 233
Join date : 2009-08-01
|Subject: The Hebrew-Celtic Connection Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:07 pm|| |
THE HEBREW - CELTIC CONNECTION
(Language, Cultural and Religious Ties! - A Missing Link In Fulfilled Prophecy)
In the eighth century, B.C., the Assyrian Empire was at its peak, and its armies threatened the nations on the eastern Mediterranean seaboard, including Israel. The Assyrians were a brutal, fearsome people, the most terrible, perhaps, in all the earth's history. Conquered lands were literally plundered of everything of value - even people, who were taken to slavery in foreign lands. The wall murals of the Assyrians, some of which now bedeck the British Museum in London, depict scenes of horrible savagery and torture. Men were sometimes skinned alive, or impaled on poles to slowly die outside the gates of a city.
Famed archaeologist Sir Austen Henry Layard, rediscovered and unearthed the ancient Assyrian cities, and graphically described the scenes on the wall murals he found: 'Captives ... were stretched naked at full length on the ground, and whilst their limbs were held apart by pegs and cords they were being flayed alive. Beneath them were other unfortunate victims under-going abominable punishments. The brains of one were apparently being beaten out with an iron mace, whilst an officer held him by the beard. A torturer was wrenching the tongue out of the mouth of a second wretch who had been pinioned to the ground. The bleeding heads of the slain were tied round the necks of the living who seemed reserved for still more barbarous tortures.'(Discoveries In The Ruins of Assyria And Babylon p. 456)
Inhabitants of Palestine in those days were well aware that Assyria would only too soon conduct a similar brutal warfare against the eastern shore of the Mediterranean. Would not large numbers of Israelites migrate westward, by land and sea, to find safety for themselves and their families outside of the Assyrian sphere of influence?
Historical evidence indicates that did indeed happen. The authoritative Dictionary of Christ & The Gospels relates, 'LARGE NUMBERS OF ISRAELITES HAD BEEN CARRIED AWAY CAPTIVE BY THE ASSYRIANS AND BABYLONIANS ... BUT A MUCH LARGER DISPERSION WAS DUE TO VOLUNTARY EMIGRATION.'(Vol. 1, p.692) Yes, more Israelites emigrated, migrated voluntarily out of Palestine, than even the large numbers of those taken away in the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. As it became clear that invasion and conquest by Assyria was imminent, Hebrews and Phoenicians emigrated westward to distant lands by the many hundreds of thousands, forming the foundation of European civilization.
These historical facts have been known for centuries, and a plethora of books by leading historians has documented 'the Phoenician origin' of Western civilization. Historians have given the Phoenicians most of the credit for this emigration from Palestine to Europe, although the Hebrews were more numerous, and were Divinely promised greatly increased numbers. Perhaps the answer to the confusion is that the Hebrew language is a Phoenician dialect, and the two are virtually identical. But as we will see, a great multitude of the 'Phoenician' speaking early European colonists can be shown to be Hebrew. Famed historian, George Rawlinson, added that, 'The Tyrians [Phoenicians] conceded to the Israelites a participation in the traffic which they had carried on for so long a time with the nations of the west. Two trading fleets were formed (I Kings 9:27; 10:22), to which each of the two nations contributed both ships and men.' (Phoenicia pp. 101 - 102) From such trading colonies grew and developed early European cities.
In the 18th century, historians discovered exciting proof of Phoenician-Celtic ties. An ancient Roman dramatist, Titus Maccius Plautus (died 184 B.C.) wrote a play, the Penulus in which he placed then current Phoenician into the speech of one of his characters. In the 18th century, linguists noticed the great similarity between that Phoenician and the early Irish Celtic language. In the adjacent box is a sample given by historian Thomas Moore's, History of Ireland, showing the connection between these languages. Leading 18th and 19th century scholars, such as Gen. Charles Vallancey, Lord Rosse, and Sir William Betham, also wrote on this subject. Vallancey, for instance, speaks of, 'The great affinity found in many words, nay whole lines and sentences of this speech, between the Punic [Phoenician] and the Irish.' Famed historian, George Rawlinson, added that this and other inscriptions are 'READILY EXPLICABLE, IF HEBREW BE ASSUMED AS THE KEY TO THEM, BUT NOT OTHERWISE.'(Phoenicia, p. 327)
THE SIMILARITY BETWEEN THE EARLY IRISH-CELTIC AND THE SECOND CENTURY, B.C., HEBREW- PHOENICIAN LANGUAGE, AS SHOWN BY THE PENULUS OF PLAUTUS:
PHOENICIAN OF PLAUTUS:
Byth lym mo thym nociothii nel ech an ti daisc machon
Ys i do iebrim thyfe lyth chy lya chon temlyph ula.
Beth liom' mo thime nociaithe, niel ach an ti dairie mae coinne
Is i de leabhraim tafach leith, chi lis con teampluibh ulla.
In 1772, General Charles Vallancey, a leading Irish scholar of the day, published his famous work, Essay On The Antiquity Of The Irish Language, Being A Collation Of The Irish With The Punic (Hebrew) Language.-In his opening remarks he states, 'On a collation of the Irish with the Celtic, Punic, Phoenician and Hebrew languages, the strongest affinity, (nay a perfect Identity in very many Words) will appear, it may therefore be deemed a Punic-Celtic compound.' Vallancey continues, 'from the Hebrew proceeded the Phoenician, from the Phoenician, Carthaginian, or Punic was derived the Aeolian, Dorian and Etruscan and from these was formed the Latin ... Of the Roman Saxon capital letters, the Irish use but three, all the others bear a very great resemblance to the primitive Hebrew and Phoenician.' (p. 2-3) Modern language scholars have confirmed that there is a definite connection between the Celtic and Hebrew, as we have shown in our tract, Hebrew And English.
Since it is true that Hebrews and Phoenicians migrated to Europe in large numbers in ancient times, there must be religious and cultural ties, and in fact, such connections abound. Dr Thornas Moore's, History of Ireland (p. 40), relates:
'That most common of all Celtic monuments, the Cromlech is to be found not only in most parts of Europe, but also in Asia,' including Palestine. 'Not less ancient and general among the Celtic nations, was the circle of upright stones, with either an altar or tall pillar in the centre, and, like its prototype at Gilgal [ancient Israel], serving sometimes as a temple of worship, sometimes as a place of national council or inauguration ... The rough, unhewn stone... used in their circular temples by the Druids, was the true, orthodox observance of the divine command delivered to Noah, 'If thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone'(Ex. 20:25) Dr Beauford, in Druidism Revived says, 'It is remarkable that all the ancient altars found in Ireland, and now distinguished by the name of Cromlechs or sloping stones, were originally called Bothal, or the House of God, and they seem to be of the same species as those mentioned in the Book of Genesis, called by the Hebrews, Bethel, which has the same signification as the Irish Bothal' The Bible (Judg. 9:6; 2 Ki. 1 1: 1 4; 2 Chr. 23:13) indicates that Hebrew kings were crowned either standing upon or next to a pillar of stone. 'The practice of seating the new king upon a stone, at his initiation, was the practice in many of the countries of Europe ... The monarchs of Sweden sat upon a stone placed in the centre of twelve lesser ones, and in a similar kind of circle the Kings of Denmark were crowned.'(Moore, ibid., p. 42) Note also the significant Bible number, 'twelve' which was common to both European Celts and the Hebrews.
The book, Identity of the Religious Druidical and Hebrew, adds, 'Circular temples ... abound in England and other parts of Europe. The most ancient account of them is to be found in the book of Exodus (24.4), "And Moses ... builded an altar under the hill and twelve pillars according to the twelve tribes." (p. 15)'. In Europe, Stonehenge, Avebury, and many other early Celtic sites were designed in a circular pattern.
Groves were also features of both Hebrew and Celtic worship. The Bible tells us that Abraham 'called on the everlasting God' (Gen. 13:4) from a grove planted by his own hand. Gideon worshipped God under an oak tree. (Judg. 6:19-24)
The division of time into a seven-day week was practiced by the Irish Celts, identical to the Hebrews. Dr Thomas Moore comments that no other nation kept such a hebdomadal (seven day) cycle 'excepting only among the family of Abraham,' (ibid., p. 54) a remarkable proof of identity between the two peoples!
Since early times, the Israelites sinned against God by adopting many of the pagan practices of their neighbours, and so we find evidence of both Hebrew and Canaanite culture among their descendants in Europe. (The Phoenician is the eastern branch of the Canaanite people.) The ancient Baal pillar shown at left is one of many such religious monuments which have been found from the Middle East to Ireland.
There are many other examples, however, of customs linking the Celtic Druids specifically with Israel. English historian, Williain Borlase, in his Antiquities Of Cornwall (1754) presented many pages of such evidence: Druids worshipped but one God and allowed no graven images, identical to the Hebrews, and in contradistinction with almost all other ancient religions.
Consecration was by sprinkling with blood, as in the Old Testament Hebrew worship. Druid priests were clothed in white, similar to the Hebrew priest's white ephod; sacrificial victims were bled to death, and the blood was collected in basins which served to sprinkle the altars; bulls were sacrificed, and the image of a bull (the heraldic sign of the Hebrew tribe of Ephraim) was carried into war.'While they performed their horrid rites of human sacrifice, the drums and trumpets sounded without intermission, that the cries of the miserable victims might not be heard.' (Compare Jer. 7:31-32, the Hebrew/Phoenician place of human sacrifice was called Tophet, meaning 'the drum'). They prayed with uplifted, hands, examined entrails for necromancy, and held the oak in veneration. The Druids used the magic wand in imitation of Moses' rod, poured libations, sacrificed upon the tops of rocks, investigated truth by lots, anointed rock pillars with oil, and marked out boundaries with stones. (pp. 104-132, 161) In these and so many other distinctive ways, the religious customs of the Celts and Hebrews bear an unmistakable resemblance!
Posts : 233
Join date : 2009-08-01
|Subject: Re: The Hebrew-Celtic Connection Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:08 pm|| |
The early name of southwestern England was 'Dumnoni', or 'Danmoni', as shown by a portion of a map in Celtic scholar, Sir John Rhys' book, Early Celtic Britain. This comprises today the British counties of Cornwall and Devon. Highly respected historian William Camden remarked concerning Cornwall: 'That region which according to the geographers, is the first of all Britain, and... was in ancient times inhabited by those Britains, whom Solinas called, Dunmonii, Ptolomy (called) Damnonii, or (as we find in some other copies),
MORE TRULY DANMONIL WHICH NAME ... DERIVED FROM THE EVER-CONTINUING MINES OF TIN IN THIS TRACT, WHICH THE BRITANS CALL MOINA.'(Britannia p. 183) This compound word is therefore composed of 'moina', a tin mine, and 'Dan', the people who mined the tin. So this most ancient region of England is properly called 'DANMONI', meaning, 'DAN'S TIN-MINES'. That these early inhabitants known as 'Dan' were in fact the Biblical tribe of the same name has been established by leading modern scholars such as Cyrus Gordon, as shown in our tract, Ancient Hebrew Sea Migrations. If these early colonists had actually been Phoenicians, the region would have been called, not Danmoni, but 'Fenimoni,' because the Phoenicians were known as the'Punic'or 'Feni' civilization.
Celtic scholar, Sir John Rhys, gives strong evidences of Hebrew colonization of the British isles in ancient times. 'lreland was known as IBERION,' he says. (p. 201) The ancient name of the Israelites was Ibri or Iberi (modern Hebrew), which is derived from the name, 'EBER', or 'HEBER', an ancestor and patriarch of that people. Sir John continues, '...in Ireland it was Ivernii in Ptolomy's time; and he mentions a town there called Ivernis, and a river Ivernios. To these may be added various forms of the name of the island such as Juvenal's luuerna, distorted more usually by the Romans into Hibernia. THEIR EPONYMOUS ANCESTOR ... is variously called EBER, Emer, and HEBER.' (ibid., p. 262-3)
Sir John discusses a region 'just in the vicinity of St David's or Mnyw, called in the Welsh Chronicle MONI IUDEORUM, which contains an allusion probably to the same people.' (ibid., p. 226) Sir John says that some scholars suggest this word, Iudeorurn or Judeorurn, may relate to the 'Jutes', a Germanic tribe in Northern Europe, but that he believes such a view incorrect. Instead, Sir John indicates that it identifies Hebrews of the tribe of Judah. Sir John adds, '... lastly we seem to have a trace of the same form in the Welsh Chronicle, sometimes called Annales Cambriae, when it calls Menevia or St. David's Moni Iudeorum. WE NEED NOT BE HERE TROUBLED BY THE LOST TEN TRIBES OF ISRAEL BUT ... IT WOULD BE HARD TO PROVE THE CONTRARY' (ibid. p.150)
Sir John also discusses early Celtic names and suggests that we '... compare Semitic names ... compare the Hebrew.' (ibid., p. 259-260)
One last fascinating connection with ancient Israel is suggested by Sir John, who says, 'the (Celtic) Kymry were for some time indifferently called Cambria or Cumbria, the Welsh word on which they are based being, as now written, Cymru ... and is there pronounced nearly as an Englishman would treat it if spelled Kumry or KUMRI.' (p. 142) As students of Old Testament history well know, 'Kumri' or'Khumri' was the name of the Israelites in Assyrian texts. (see, 'The March of Archaeology, by C.W Ceram, p. 216) The virtual identity in spelling and sound between the Israelite 'Khumri', and the Celtic 'Kymry', is too much of a coincidence to not have a relationship. Taken with the rnany other evidences, religious and cultural, the connection between the ancient Hebrews and Celts is too strong to be ignored.
In fact, it is no longer a question of, 'Did Hebrews settle in Europe in ancient times?' but only a question of, 'How many of the people of Europe are of Hebrew descent?' When considering the great numbers of early Israelites (see our tract, The Real Diaspora), and the Biblical promise of multitudinous seed (Gen. 26:4, 32:12; Ex. 32:13; Jer. 33:22, etc.), it is evident that the Hebrew-Celtic connection is very significant.
Irish history records three main waves of colonization to that isle in ancient times: the Firbolgs, of whom little is known, the Tuatha de Danaan (meaning 'Tribe of Dan', tuath means 'tribe'), and the Milesians. The latter two peoples are known to have originated in Asia and may have been related. The Story of Ireland by A.M. Sullivan, tells us this: 'The Milesian colony ... were an Eastern people... they had passed from land to land, from the shores of Asia across the wide expanse of southern Europe, bearing aloft through all their wanderings the Sacred Banner which symbolized to them at once their origin and their mission, the blessing and the promise given to their race. This celebrated standard, the "Sacred Banner of the Milesians," was a flag on which was represented a dead serpent and the rod of Moses...' (p. 12) The Milesians traced their ancestry to 'Gadelius', whose grandfather was 'the king of Scythia' (p.13) Interestingly, Gad was a son of the patriarch Jacob, and his descendants formed one of the tribes of Israel. The Greek word Scythia is derived from the Semitic, Skutha, and the Persian, Saca, which are terms for the Israelites. (see our tract, The Real Diaspora) As if this wasn't enough coincidence, the serpent symbol was a family heraldic emblem of the Israelite tribe of Dan (Gen. 49:17), whose descendants have been traced by leading modern American archaeologist Cyrus Gordon, to the Tuatha de Danaan of early Ireland! (see Before Columbus, pp. 108-111)
Therefore we can say that in all of these (and a multitude of other) ways, the Celts and Hebrews bear a remarkable relationship. Since the Celts were spread over most of Europe, the cultural, historical, and theological implications of this truth are immensely significant. Write us for other tracts and literature on this theme!
Posts : 233
Join date : 2009-08-01
|Subject: Celtic Foundations of the Earth Sun Aug 02, 2009 2:56 pm|| |
THE CELTIC FOUNDATIONS OF THE EARTH
B. Paul Blegen
WHEN David spoke to Nathan about building a temple and received Nathan's approval, the Lord intervened in a strange way. The incident occupies the entire seventh chapter of 2 Samuel.
First the Lord makes a speech to Nathan, then He commands Nathan to make a speech to David, then David makes a speech to the Lord; all three speeches are in some detail, and do not seem to be to the point about not building a temple. The words of the Lord seem to be of a slight rebuking tone, and Nathan reports the words of the Lord to David, in part with this now renowned promise: 'I will appoint a place for my people Israel'
But there is more ....
'Also the Lord telleth thee', said Nathan 'that He will make you a house ... and thine house and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee' (vv. 10, 11, 16). David, perhaps perplexed, replied to the Lord. 'Then went King David in, and sat down before the Lord [ Smith & Goodspeed ], and he said, Who am I, 0 Lord God but thou hast spoken also of thy servant's house for a great while to come; thou wouldst foretell the destiny of thy servant's line in days far hence; Lord God, can mortal man claim such rights, 0 Lord God? And what can David say more unto thee?' The last italicized passage is from Knoxs translation, to which he has this footnote: 'It seems necessary to take these words (literally, this is the law of Adam) ... ', and so he brings this all the way back to Adam. (All italics and upper case emphases are this author's throughout).
We think of the 'House of David' in David's expression 'thy servants house' as referring to his descendants; but what if David also means 'the House of Israel'? The 'whole house' was his to reign over, and will be again. (But this House would be remoulded.)
David later confirms that the reason he was not to build the Lord a house was because of the blood shed in his many wars. So it seems to me that a reason for this seemingly obscure dialogue does go back much further, yes to Adam and beyond. (The 'appointed place' passage certainly referred to the House of Israel, then some centuries old.)
In the allegory of the Israel vine in Isaiah 5 we are told of a 'very fruitful hill; and he fenced it'; afterward, he would 'break down the wall; [fence] thereof' by way of condemnation. So we had an effective boundary around our House of Jacob. Going back still further, Moses tells us that 'he set the bounds of the people' according as he portioned out the nations' Inheritances. An inheritance implies possessions, planning, foreknowledge, and an earlier time; He did this 'when he separated the sons of Adam' (Deut. 32:
We are told clearly that 'we were formed' by the Lord 'for himself; we shall shew forth his praise'.
Understand that there are two notions here, first that God formed and second, that it is pointedly us whom he formed.
The margin reading for Isaiah 37:26, The Oxford Bible, reads 'hast thou not heard I have made it long ago, formed it of ancient times?' (quoting from 2 Kings 19: 25). 'I have formed thee, 0 Israel; fear not thou art my servant' (Isa. 43:1; 44:21). And there is this third notion, too: we were formed long ago to be His servant . There is a connection in all this.
See that these really 'are ancient things' (Isa. 46: 10), 'God is my king of old' (Psa. 74:12). He must be older still then than His throne, for he Himself established it: 'the world also is established that it cannot be moved - thy throne is established of old', from then [margin] (Psa. 93:1,2). Moreover, in Micah 6:2, we are called the 'strong foundations of the earth'.
From this nexus we see that the throne over Israel was established not later than when the world was fixed; the 'from then' [margin] refers directly to the time when the world was fixed of old. So in Daniel, we read of 'the Ancient of Days' [now Father), 'even he that abideth of old' (Psa. 55:19); that is, 'he abideth from of old'.
So the Father is of old, our Lord, Redeemer, Kinsman and King is of old, and we, ourselves the sheep of His pasture, are of old and likewise our bounds and our purchase from Egypt are from 'of old' (Psa. 74:2 and Deut. 9:27-29).
When the Israel Truth was first given to me years ago, it was explained how the House of Omri, Beth Omri, became the bit k'Umri of the Assyrians' language, bit standing for the Hebrew Beth, or 'house' and the k or k' standing for the preposition 'of'; and how later they or part of them became known as Kimmerians or Kimmeroi and so forth. But it was never explained what the term Celt meant. I had been studying Hebrew at that time, so I knew intuitively where the answer lay hid and it didn't take much searching to find it.
When I acquired Gladys Taylor's excellent little set, Our Neglected Heritage, it was interesting to read in volume four on page six, what she wrote about these 'Celts':
'The name Celt is a mystery to historians; none have solved the puzzle of its meaning or derivation, or the language from which it comes';
... and again:
'It was widely used by the Greeks, but they had taken it from some earlier source ... Kelltoi is meaningless as a descriptive word'.
Let me show you today that it really is descriptive, and show you its derivation, too. The Greeks being first Hebrews and the Greek language being drawn heavily from the Hebrew, we should be alert to search the Hebrew/Semitic tongues.
Gladys Taylor goes on to say ...
'The name itself is very old!',
... pointing out that they (the Keltoi) are mentioned sometimes, particularly by the Roman writers, in connection with the Kimmerians [ Khamri ] ... show[ing] a relationship between these two considerable race groups.' (The letter c developed from the letter k, and both are the same, the pronunclation 'selt' is incorrect - as it is often pronounced in the U.S.)
Posts : 233
Join date : 2009-08-01
|Subject: Re: The Hebrew-Celtic Connection Sun Aug 02, 2009 2:56 pm|| |
The quickest philological explanation probably is that the Greeks called them Kelts because they, the Greeks, being - many of them - Hebrews themselves, knew they were God's elect, as Isaiah clearly tells. In passing from the Hebrews to the Greeks, and again to the Romans, ears hear differently, and the Romans might pronounce the Greek 'ek-lectos' (elect) as 'ek- kelt-os'. This kind of transposition happened often in ancient times - and still does!
Still, the Celts called themselves Celts, and I think that this is not the true solution. 1 think they were less aware of Isaiah's writings than they were of the law and the Psalms, and we shall see presently that there is another solution. And besides, it would require a knowledge on the part of the Greeks that we do not know from Scripture that they had.
The riddle is easily solved when we assign the same style to this name as was applied to the term bit khumri. Kelt or K'elt is formed from the root 'elt' just as Kimry is formed from the root Umri or Omri. 'Elt' means 'old'. I found this proof under the entry elt in a Gem a dictionary where I had searched first because in German alt means 'old'. So it is apparent that Waddell comes closest in his Phoenician Origins, where he refers to them as 'Khalt'.
To elaborate, the 1995 Thorndike Barnhart World Book Dictionary (Chicago, London, Sydney, Toronto), states under the entry 'old' that 'old' comes from the Old English ald eald and that the archaic English noun eld comes from 'eldo' or 'ald'. This dictionary then quotes for usage: 'of old hast thou laid the FOUNDATIONS OF THE EARTH'(Psa. 102:25) (italics theirs, upper case mine). And how good it is to see that our best and newest dictionaries STILL hark back to the Holy Scriptures! It also gives 'ealderman' as the obsolete form of 'alderman'; 'ealder + mann'(see entry 'alderman'). 'Ald' is the same as the German alt the substitution of the d for the t is merely one of tongue and ear.
In the same dictionary under, the entry 'eld', the derivation is given thusly: '[ Old English eldo < ald old]' meaning that eldo 'developed into', or became, 'ald', old.
'Elder', in Old English ealdra, is but the comparative of 'ald' according to Thorndike under the entry 'elder'.
The first thing this dictionary says under the entry 'eld' is:
'n. archaic. 1 ancient times'
and gives this quote for usage: 'lands that contain the monuments of eld (Byron)'.
Thus 'K'elt' means ancient or 'of old', and we, those ones of old are his people, his people of old, and so we are then, His ancient ones.
Is there proof for this in the Scriptures themselves? The Hebrew words 'old' and 'eld' in Strongs at 2056 and 3205 refer to lineage, offspring, and begettal. Remernbering what we learned in the preceding paragraphs, we should remember also that 'we are the offspring of God' that Ancient of Days
['God the Ancient' in the Sacred Name Bible] who sits on the ancient throne (Acts 17:29 and Psa. 93:2).
Isaiah tells, 'I have appointed the ancient people' (44:7), clearly referring to us, and 'the Lord of hosts shall reign in Zion, and in Jerusalem, and there shall be glory before 'his ancients'. (24:23). Here, His people are expressly called 'his ancients'. What more proof do we need?
It is said that only some Celtic tribes called thernselves 'Celt'. This doesn't mean that all Israel aren't God's ancient ones. Only some tribes were known as Cimmerians, too, but we know that that term refers to all of the House of Israel taken away in captivity. And there are many similar examples which could be set out.
Now, Gladys Taylor takes this still further in her same first chapter. She relates how, in The Book of Jubilees there is a reference to 'the mountain of the Celt toward the north'.
At Isaiah 41 we are addressed to 'keep silence before me, 0 isles, and let the people renew their strength'. In Isaiah 14:13,the mount of the congregation is indicated as 'the sides of the north', and in Psalm 48:2 Mount Zion is referred to as 'the sides of the north'; in Jeremiah 1:15 those of Britain and the lands round about it are 'the families of the kingdoms of the north'. The use of the term 'mountain' with reference to Israel occurs numerous times; and again, its connection with the Stone in Daniel two, cut out of the mountain is understood by us all.
In the phrase 'sides of the north', 'sides' is given by Strong's at 3411 as follows,
'feminine of 3409 ... coasts,
[or in other words the phrase would read, 'coasts of the north']
At 3409 we read
'by euphemism the generative parts; ... body, loins...'
So we can also understand, then, that Zion, the congregation, the mountain of Israel, and the sides of the north, all refer to our being His 'offspring' ... and 'brought forth' out of Egypt; 'from the wilderness [of Egypt] ... there thy mother brought thee forth': Song of Solomon 8:5. Knox rendered this as 'where sore distress overtook thine own mother, where she that bore thee had her hour of shame', meaning in the wilderness, when Israel was brought forth across the Red Sea. Without going into deeper things, we can see 'that He [our Saviour] might be the firstborn among many brethren'(Ro. 8:29). We are His brethren, He our Kinsman.
In 1 Peter 1:3, Peter says that 'our Father hath begotten us, again'- that is, a second time. Going back into the Old Testament, we run across our grandparents and cousins bitterly complaining about something, and Moses takes the matter to the Lord, and in a kind of complaint of his own, he asks Him, 'Have I conceived all this people? Have I begotten them?' (Nu. 11:12). In Deuteronomy 32:18 Moses tells them that they were begotten of the Rock, and formed by God. And in Psalm 2:7 we have the Father saying 'Thou art my Son - this day have I begotten thee', too,
I began this article by titling it The Celtic Foundations of the Earth. Bonnie Gaunt points out that the number 12 is the number of the foundations of the earth; 12, as in the 12 tribes. She notes that 99% of the bedrock of the earths crust is composed of twelve elements.
She also points out that 12 of the significant Stonehenge alignments point to an extreme position of the sun [a symbol of the Son] and that 12 alignments point to an extreme position of the moon [a symbol of Rachel and of Israel - Genesis 37:9, 10; Revelation 12:11.
The number 12 is also the active agent in creation, she notes. Photosynthesis is possible only because of the twelve-fold symmetry of the chlorophyll molecule, which transforms light into substance.
Bonnie Gaunt has written a series of seminal, original books showing the Parallels of Stonehenge and the Great Pyramid and threading through them sacred, Biblical gematria. Her discoveries are astounding.
Write to her for a book list at 510 Golf Avenue, Jackson, MI 49203 USA.
Reprinted from Tribesman
Posts : 233
Join date : 2009-08-01
|Subject: Celtic-Israelite Commonalities Sat Aug 08, 2009 11:18 am|| |
To many who are interested in the history of the Celtic peoples and their modern descendants in Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Brittany and Cornwall, and from their descendants around the world a subject that is often brought up is possible connections with the ancient Israelites, in particular the “Lost Tribes” of Israel.
The purpose of this article is not to establish ‘connections’ to the Lost Tribes, but to discuss some of the many common characteristics of these modern Celtic peoples and the ancient Israelites. These characteristics I call Commonalities. I am not attempting in this short article to establish connections which have been addressed in many other volumes such as The Tribes and Ephraim by Yair Davidy and The Lost Tribes of Israel — Found! by Steven Collins as well as in ancient works. I am simply going to point out and discuss a very few of the great many commonalities between these peoples.
THE LOST TRIBES OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL
The peoples we refer to as the Lost Tribes were part of the Northern Kingdom of Israel which was conquered by the Assyrians around 740-720 B.C. and exiled to areas in Assyria and to the north. This is told in the Bible in 2 Kings chapters 17 and 18. About the same time a contingent from the Kingdom of .Judah were also exiled to the northern lands. It is these peoples and their immediate descendants that are also variously referred to as the Lost Tribes, and the subject of many works and studies.
Being both Irish and Jewish, I grew up familiar with customs and the cultures of both peoples, only in later years becoming aware that they were quite different cultures and had greatly varying cultural characteristics. Yet growing up with both cultures, I had noticed similarities even on a casual basis. Over the years I began to see more of this similarity and in recent years I began to collect this data into what I term an Overview which I am still assembling. It is this Overview in differing areas of life that I will discuss here.
There are a number of areas that I have been looking at which includes: language, agriculture, religion and taboos, burial practices, music and folk dancing, the traditions and self determinations and self-identification of the Celts and other areas as they arise. I will point out a few items in each category and note that these are just a few of a great many commonalities and I mention them as examples.
Language is one of the subjects that led to my overall interest in the topic as early on I had noticed similarities. Considering the long period of time from the expulsion of the Israelites to our time, it would seem unlikely that there would be little, if any, common letters, words or structure, but that is not the case — there is indeed much in common.
Gaelic is a member of the Celtic group of the Indo-European family of languages that includes Russian, English, German, Spanish, French, Hindi and Italian. The Celtic group has been confined to the British Isles and part of the French coast.
The Celtic group is divided into two divisions which has three languages in each division. Each division makes up its own unique language. The two branches are:
the BRYTHONIC branch which is made up of the Welsh, Breton and Cornish languages,
the GOIDELIC branch with the Irish, Scots and Manx Gaelic languages.
The Breton and Cornish languages are seeing some resurgence after near extinction while the Irish, Scots and Welsh languages are holding their own at this time. Manx is an ancient form of Irish and is considered to be the oldest and purest Irish Gaelic in existence. Manx is very close to the extinct dialects of nearby Ulster and Galloway and separated from Old Irish in about the fifth century of our era. It occupies much the same position to Old Irish as Icelandic does to Old Norse. For the purpose of my study I have chosen to concentrate on Manx and Scots Gaelic. I am sure though that an in-depth study of Welsh or the other Gaelic languages would provide much food for thought on this issue.
The Gaelic alphabet as well as the ordinal numbers show more commonality than could be expected after 2,700 years of divergence; for example we have a Hebrew “S” retained in the modern Gaelic - the Hebrew Sheen, pronounced Sh is found in the Irish “S” as in the name Sean pronounced Shawn. Other letters are similar, the ordinal numbers 6 & 7 are pronounced almost the same as Hebrew and Gaelic.
Words with same or similar meanings abound; for instance the Hebrew word for holy in common usage according to Halacha (Jewish law) is Kasher. The word in Manx Gaelic for hallowed or holy is Casherick. The syntax of Gaelic is entirely different from any other European language, especially English. R.L. Thompson, in his work Outline of Manx Literature and Language says that “in several respects Gaelic syntax has similarities with that of languages like Hebrew and Arabic”.
As in Hebrew, adjectives follow the noun that they describe: for example “ben vie” = “a good woman” in Gaelic and “Rosh ketan” = “small head” or “stupid” in Hebrew. (Vie or ketan being the adjectives) The word order also is similar in Hebrew in that the verb is usually first in the sentence unlike English or many other European languages. These are just a very few of the many commonalities that I believe suggest a definite connection between the two languages and their family streams. This alone could constitute a major comparative study.
COMMONALITIES IN ETHNIC CUSTOMS
One of the first areas in which I noticed similarities was in customs, notably folk dancing and later, musical instruments. The Hebrew Hora and other old traditional dances are paralleled in many Gaelic folk dances and especially the wedding dance of the Gaels which is very similar to the traditional Ashkenazic wedding dances of Europe. The musical instruments of the Gaels are found in the Israelite tradition, notably the harp in both Celtic tales and certainly Hebrew tradition as the favoured instrument of the psalmist David [see the article “The Harp of David and the Harp of Ireland” by John Wheeler in the August-October issue of Origins of Nations - Ed]. But, one of the most intriguing things to come up was that the Irish and Scots pipes we are all familiar with have their origins in the desert flute played daily throughout the Middle East. The flute of the desert shepherds is identifiable in the “chanter” of the Irish and Scots pipes.
Posts : 233
Join date : 2009-08-01
|Subject: Re: The Hebrew-Celtic Connection Sat Aug 08, 2009 11:19 am|| |
AMAZING RELIGIOUS PARALLELS
The ancient religion of the Celtic peoples prior to Christianity was generally believed to be Druidism, of which we know very little; yet that which we do know has many overtones of the Canaanite religions that the northern tribes turned to after the split of King Solomon’s Kingdom under his son into a Northern and a Southern Kingdom. Like the pagans of Canaan, their sacred places became high hilltops and sacred groves, notably oaks. There are a great deal of similarities from what we know archaeologically in both the Northern Kingdom ritual sites and the Druid sites in the Isles. Additionally, the burial practices of both the peoples of the northern Kingdom and the Celts bear much similarity in the presence of Dolmens — large slabs of stone placed horizontally across upright stones with the graves under them. These are found throughout the area of Europe which Celtic peoples passed and are found also in the areas of present day Jordan and Israel in which the Northern Israelite tribes dwelled.
You can find pictures of these dolmens in Yair Davidy’s book Ephraim on pages 137-38. This book is available from History Research Projects. Overseas it may be purchased direct from Yair Davidy in Israel (addresses on inside back cover).
EVEN AGRICULTURAL SIMILARITIES!
Agriculturally there are interesting commonalities — the grain crops are much the same, and even though wheat was known to them in their passage through Europe it was not a major crop in their final homes. In fact oats and barley were their staple grains. As with the Israelites, the cattle were of several colours, but the preferred colour for ritual for both peoples was red. The virgin cow used in the Hebrew ritual for purification was the forerunner of the red cattle used by the Druids in their rituals.
After the invasion of the Romans into the Isles, white cattle were introduced and later used; until that time red was the preferred colour. One of the most famous wars in Irish history was over a Red Bull stolen by a northern Irish tribe. Also, swine were not raised in any of the early Celtic areas until after they were introduced by the Romans; the Celts had a taboo against them along with scaleless fish as eels and shellfish. The Celts, in similitude to the Israelites, were excellent herdsmen and developed identifiable breeds of sheep, cattle and horses, that carried on the traditions of the Israelites.
Perhaps one of the most telling of the commonalities is simply the self-identification as Israelites the Hibernians - the name of the Irish and the Scots and the Hebrides Islands off the coast of Scotland. The Milesians, one of the early Celtic peoples to come to Ireland from Spain had a tradition that they were of the Lost Tribes. The name Heber, Eber, or H’berian is found throughout early literature to describe the Celts as they described themselves to be “Of Eber” — the grandfather of Abraham.
What I have presented here in greatly abbreviated form just skims the surface of the commonalities between the Celtic Peoples and the Israelites. There is a tremendous amount of information available for those who would like to look at this closer themselves. A few resources are listed at the end. This is one of those subjects in which at first one can say “oh, that’s an interesting coincidence”. But the sheer mass of these “coincidences” that build up after one goes from one discipline to another becomes totally overwhelming. The fact that so much of the languages are similar almost three thousand years later, that customs are clearly identifiable as being related, that religious practices are uniquely similar and that the everyday agricultural practices and crops were similar — all along with the many other commonalities bespeak a common origin.
For those interested in pursuing this I wish you well and much enjoyment.
Suggested information sources:
Manx Gaelic Society, Yn Cheshaght Ghailckagh, St Judes, Isle of Man IM7 2EW United Kingdom
Gaelic Books Council, Dept of Celtic, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Scotland
Yair Davidy, Brit-Am, PO Box 595, Jerusalem, Israel 91004
Chadwick, N (1965) Celtic Britain. London.
Chadwick, N (1970) The Celts. United Kingdom.
Rankin, H (1987) Celts and the Classical World London.
Squire, C (1905) Celtic Myth and Legend, Poetry and Romance. London.
Squire, C (1909) The Mythology of Ancient Britain and Ireland. London.
Posts : 233
Join date : 2009-08-01
|Subject: Symbols of Britain and Ireland's 4 Cymry Tribes Sun Aug 09, 2009 3:32 pm|| |
SYMBOLS OF BRITAIN AND IRELAND'S FOUR CYMRY TRIBES
Sir Lewis J. Errol Hay, U.K.
WITH reference to the "Red Dragon on a black ground" borne on the Welsh standard, explained by Rev. Commander Roberts, R.N., in The National Message, No. 59, under heading "Enquirers Answered," and quoted statement by Mr.William James that the Kimry in Italy "rose in arms and greeted their British cousins, when they saw it." It is interesting to inquire who were the latter and what cognisances were borne on their standards?
In The National Message, No. 14, quoting from Davies' "British Druids," and his translations of old Welsh poems, the writer endeavoured to show that the "British cousins" of the "Kymry" in Wales were, according to the Welsh Bard, the four "Cymry," or "Kymry" (the written Celtic "C" appears to be pronounced "K") tribes, who inhabited the four dialectically different regions of Britain during the Roman occupation.
In the same article the writer recalled the fact that Caesar had noted the difference - then existing - between the people inhabiting SouthWales and the other tribes.
If this South Wales tribe of the primitive inhabitants - having the "Red Dragon on a black ground" as their cognisance - were a Japhetic survival, as seems probable, according to Caesar,the other tribes differed from them, and thus, having regard to the latter's symbolic cognisances, it may be possible to reconcile the
seemingly conflicting views.
According to the ancient Welsh Bard, these four tribes were the Cymry, Eingyl, Gwyddyl, Prydyn, speaking four different dialects of the Celtic language, and then inhabiting the following regions:
1) Cymry -North Wales and north-westwards to the River Clyde in Scotland.
2) Angles - North-east England.
3) Gwyddelians - Comprising the Gaelic-speaking Caledonians of Alba and Ulladh (Ulster); the Scoti of Ulster and Argyle; and the Milesians in Ireland, speaking Erse, said by some authorities to be a dialect of the still more ancient Gaelic.
4) Brythons - Similar to the Cymry of North Wales,of Belgic origin inhabiting South England, and according to the Welsh Bard, North Britain, or northern Pictavia.
The Saxons, under Hengist and Horsa, though defeated at first, by Vortimer, established themselves during Vortigern's reign, circa A.D. 445. Their cognisance
was "a prancing white horse on a field," and they are stated to have been of Celtic origin by James Logan, R.SA (Scot.), in "The Scottish Gael."
Now, with reference to the cognisances of some of the above tribes, the following passage from the "History of Ancient Caledonia," p.107, describing a battle between the Caledonians and Britons (sic), seems significant:-
"The well-known flag of the King of Britain (the Red Dragon) was hoisted, and then the green pine tree branch, with the bloody (sic) hand of the McDonalds, and the Red Lion, went up."
The latter cognisance -the "rampant Red Lion on a golden field" - is distinctly Judaic, rather than Japhetic.
Turning now to "Eire Ard, Inis na Righ," by J.S. (p.61), the author, giving an account of the Milesian invasion of Ireland, quotes the following by Canon Bourke:
"On landing, the ex-Queen Scota unfurled the sacred banner (on which, it is said, were the serpent and the rod of Moses).The battle of Sliabh Mis (in Co.Kerry) followed; the Danaans were defeated, but Scota (with Fas and two Druids) was slain. Stones with Ogham inscriptions were erected over the graves of the slain. Within the past thirty years the stones - those of Scota and Fas - have been discovered, and the inscriptions have been read and explained by William Williams, of Dungarvan."
Whether ex-Queen Scota accompanied the Erse-speaking Gaal Sciot Iber on the occasion of their invasion of Ireland from Galicia, Spain, circa 1000 B.C., according to O'Conor's Chronology in the "Chronicles of Eri," in which she does not appear to figure, or the Gaelic speaking Scoti - seemingly the Scottish invasion mentioned by O'Flaherty - one thousand years later (i.e., "about 1,200 years after the Exodus" - Scots Barons' "Letter to Pope John XXII," 1320), also from Galicia, Spain, is immaterial, the point being that the sacred cognisance, said to have been borne on ex-Queen-Scota's standard, was a Mosaic and not a Japhetic one! This cognisance - "the serpent on Moses' rod" (cf .John 3:14) - was described, in an article published last year by the Irish Times, as the oldest now known in Irish history, but the writer omitted all reference to "David's Harp" (with or without the female figure), and the "Right Red Hand" of Ulster, and of Eirin, when Ulster's kings were Ard Righs! These cognisances also are not Japetic.
With reference to the derivation and meaning of the words Celt and Celtic, the following sentence in Punic (or Libyan, according to Bochart), Irish (Erse), and
English, is suggestive of its original true meaning, and its translation into Hebrew -akin to Punic -may disclose a connection.
It occurs in "Eire Are, Inis na Righ" (p. 11 ):
Punic: "Celt urn co mu cro lueni!"
Irish: "Celtuaim c'a macro luanil"
English:"Hide not from me the children of my loins!"
Webster's "International Dictionary's" reference to Celt confirms the English meaning "hide," but explains that the Celts were (apparently) so named by Greek and Roman writers because they lived hidden in woods and coverts!
Having regard to the Continental history of the Celtic tribes and the sentence above quoted, may not the name "Celt" have been given by themselves to the Greeks and Romans, indicating that they considered themselves the "hidden," and thus "Lost Tribes"?
With reference to this suggested derivation of the word "Celt" (pronounced Kelt), Rev. Commander Roberts comments:
"Cheldai" may also contain the etymological derivation of Chelt, Celt, a people, who recognised that their ancestor came originally from Chaldea, 'Abraham the Celt.' In the Gaelic, Ceille De (pronounced Keille De) means the servant of God."
|Subject: Re: The Hebrew-Celtic Connection || |
The Hebrew-Celtic Connection