“the Scythians, born of the Hebrews”???

Hey, a double bonus on the “Strange Maps” blog, today!

I have linked to this really fantastic blog before, and I find the little gems on display there to be entertaining and often educational.  But today held a nice surprise!

The map (actually posted yesterday, apparently) is from 1730 and is entitled “Europa Polyglotta” or “Multilingual Europe”.  It proposes to display the languages and alphabets of Europe at the time arranged so as to attach them to their location of use on the map and to relate their “genealogy”.

And as the blog’s author points out, in the top right hand area you will find an alphabet listed under “the Scythians, born of the Hebrews.”  (Emphasis happily mine.)

As we stress in our publications, in a real and significant way the British-descended people are of the Hebrews–of the stock of ancient Israel–and understanding that is a vital key to understanding Biblical prophecy.  Those who claim that the notion is a modern invention don’t have their facts straight.  (Would it make much sense to claim that this “linguistic cartographer” of 1730 somehow invented something no one had heard of before?)  It may not be popular ground, but it is well-tread, nonetheless, and a find like this is a refreshing reminder of that fact.

If you want to read more about the connection between Britain, America, Scythia, ancient Israel, and Bible prophecy–suggested by this map–then our free booklet is for you: The United States and Great Britain in Prophecy.   It can be read online, but I greatly recommend ordering the free print version which contains some maps and graphics that are not present in the HTML version.

If Bible prophecy seems awkward to you or hard to understand (or “close but not quite”-ish), OR if you are completely new to Bible prophecy, I cannot recommend this booklet enough!  The events that lie ahead are too dramatic to afford not being prepared.  The booklet is free (as in really free… not free-but-with-donation-begging free, or let-us-then-call-you-constantly-about-visiting-you free.  Just plain free as in Matthew 10:8 free), and you won’t believe the change it will make in how you understand the Bible and Bible prophecy.

8 thoughts on ““the Scythians, born of the Hebrews”???

  1. Patricia Burns

    I recommend that anyone interested in the subject of Bible prophecy join in Internet fellowship with Bible Prophecy on the Web.

  2. Greetings, Ms. Burns, and thanks for deciding that this post was at least worth advertising on.

    I hope you don’t mind but I deleted the link you provided. It seems to me that the last thing the world needs an increase in the cacophony of prophecy “teachers”. Rather, it needs the truth (the whole truth), which, I’m afraid, doesn’t seem to be available on the sites associated with the forum at the link you provided.

    But, if I may take the time to advertise, myself, http://www.tomorrowsworld.com would be a good destination for anyone looking to understand Bible prophecy. 😀

    Thanks, again —
    Wallace Smith

  3. Thomas

    Josephus tells us that the ten tribes were an innumerable multitude beyond the Euphrates in his day. That the Parthians and Scythians who lived east of the Euphrates were caucasian can easily be seen in contemporary Greek and Roman depictions of them where their features are clearly European and the clothes they wear look like they belong on Medieval Europeans.
    That map links the Scythians with their Israelite roots (like the Declaration of Arbroath mentioned in The United States and Great Britain in Prophecy). Once you know the truth of matters you wonder how the experts can misinterpret the evidence 🙂
    That map is a nice find. Thanks!

  4. isaiah30v8

    Hello Wallace,

    Don’t agree with your dating of the 7 times.

    As a one time athiest one of the things I did was test the bible for myself.

    I used another interpretation of the 7 time prophecy to test the validity of some end time prophecies. This interpretation arrive at a different date than yours.

    It worked! Which means the interpretation I tested was valid.

    Here is the interpretation:

    ablebodiedman.blogspot.com/2004/10/how-was-1914-calculated-using-bible.html

    Here is the method I used which assures me that it really is ‘”the whole truth”.

    I called the article “Armchair Archeology”

    ablebodiedman.blogspot.com/

    regards

    Geoff

    I am now a Christian

  5. Howdy, isaiah30v8/Geoff —

    Thanks for the comment, and I’m glad that you found it worth your time.

    First, I must say that you can’t say that you “arrived at a different date than [mine]” since I gave no date anywhere. We have enough to know that we are startlingly near the end of God’s 6,000-year pre-Millennium plan, but the specific dates–however near–are, for now, a mystery.

    I’m glad that the blog entry motivated you enough to at least take a look at our literature. However, I’m sorry that you gave up on it the moment that you found something that disagreed with the interpretation you had already worked out. Your website seems to indicate that you have done a lot of work to come up with your interpretation, yet, as I’m sure you know, “no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20).

    The arguments you make concerning 1914, the Tunguska blast, etc. all seem a bit forced and reliant on a good deal of human assumption. That 1914 is the prophecy-fulfilling date that it is made out by some to be is a proposition that stretches credulity beyond the limits of both human reasoning and scriptural truth (obviously, the latter being the one of greatest concern).

    Let me mention just one thing to get you started… You make much of your interpretation of Daniel 4:23, when the Bible leaves no room for your interpretation. Daniel says, himself in the very next verse, Daniel 4:24, “This is the interpretation, O king, and this is the decree of the Most High, which has come upon my lord the king…” He then goes on to explain the prophecy as being one about Nebuchadnezzar, himself — the fulfillment of which is described in the verses that immediately follow. God leaves no one room to fit a 1914-justifying prophecy in there, no matter how many greased shoe horns we wish to apply to the Scriptures. By saying that the “1914 scenario” is, somehow, a fulfillment of this prophecy in Daniel 4, not only do you invent something that the scriptures do not ask for, tie it into an event that the scriptures do not indicate, and disagree with Daniel, himself, the author of the book, but you also find yourself disagreeing with God, Himself, who inspired the prophecy and ties it directly to the humbling of Nebuchadnezzar in verses 31-32 through a miraculous voice from heaven. Forgive me, but a Biblical prophet has more authority concerning the fulfillment of a prophecy recorded in his own book, as does a miraculous voice from heaven, than a blog on the Internet. Even if it were my own blog. 😀

    The human ideas and scriptural twisting that has been drafted into the effort to make 1914 “work” has deceived too many people for too long, and I hope you are able to untangle yourself from that idea in the days to come.

    You mention on your website that you “just want to know the truth.” That’s great! But if so, you will need to be willing to give up some of the ideas that you have apparently attached yourself to. I suggest that the result of your “testing” is not, as you say, that “the interpretation I tested was valid,” but rather that human beings’ willingness to look at evidence selectively is rooted more deeply than most imagine. Indeed, “[t]he heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; Who can know it?” as it says in Jeremiah 17:9.

    Thankfully, we have an encouraging answer in verse 10, and if you can open yourself up to where you might be wrong, God can open up to you with what is right. That’s not only true for you, but for all of us.

    I hope you will look again at our literature — not just concerning the identity of Israel in modern times, but all that we offer.

    Thanks, again —
    Wallace Smith

  6. isaiah30v8

    [Editor’s Note: The items brought up in this well-intentioned blog comment are addressed in the blog comment immediately following. Thanks! — WGS, Thoughts En Route]

    “First, I must say that you can’t say that you “arrived at a different date than [mine]” since I gave no date anywhere. We have enough to know that we are startlingly near the end of God’s 6,000-year pre-Millennium plan, but the specific dates–however near–are, for now, a mystery.”

    The date you give is 1800ad.

    Here’s the quote right from your material:

    “Seven prophetic times 2,520 years went by from the time of Samaria’s fall and Israel’s captivity in 721bc. This brings us to 1800ad ”

    So already I’m doubting everything you have said in your post above.

    In the above again you said this:

    “Let me mention just one thing to get you started… You make much of your interpretation of Daniel 4:23, when the Bible leaves no room for your interpretation. Daniel says, himself in the very next verse, Daniel 4:24, “This is the interpretation, O king, and this is the decree of the Most High, which has come upon my lord the king…” He then goes on to explain the prophecy as being one about Nebuchadnezzar, himself — the fulfillment of which is described in the verses that immediately follow. God leaves no one room to fit a 1914-justifying prophecy in there, no matter how many greased shoe horns we wish to apply to the Scriptures. By saying that the “1914 scenario” is, somehow, a fulfillment of this prophecy in Daniel 4, not only do you invent something that the scriptures do not ask for, tie it into an event that the scriptures do not indicate, and disagree with Daniel, himself, the author of the book, but you also find yourself disagreeing with God, Himself, who inspired the prophecy and ties it directly to the humbling of Nebuchadnezzar in verses 31-32 through a miraculous voice from heaven. Forgive me, but a Biblical prophet has more authority concerning the fulfillment of a prophecy recorded in his own book, as does a miraculous voice from heaven, than a blog on the Internet. Even if it were my own blog.”

    Then how did the material you are advising your audience to read arrive at 1800ad?

    Your argument above undermines your own interpretation of prophecy.

    Certainly if your material says the 7 times lead to the date 1800ad then the one who attempted to interpret this scripture was intelligent enough to realize the prophecy had a greater fulfillment than the immediate one given to Nebuchadnezzar. You don’t seem to agree with this idea yourself and yet are asking the same audience to spend time “reading through the material”.

    You should read the material first so you don’t shoot yourself in the foot again.

    I think I just wasted my time reading your stuff, unless of course it helps you see through your own self deceptions.

    Hope you can work through the problems you seem to be having here.

    regards

    Geoff

  7. Greetings, again, isaiah30v8/Geoff –

    Forgive me, but you have (I assume accidentally) treated our literature in the same way you have treated the Bible: taking things out of context and cherry picking the evidence.

    If you actually did read the portion of the booklet from which you lifted two sentences, then you saw there that we did not in any way misinterpret the prophecy of Daniel to arrive at those figures. The count comes from the seven times which God stated in Leviticus that he would punish Israel and have nothing to do with the book of Daniel. Did you really read this part or not?

    If you did read it, then please read it again but consider paying closer attention. The only reason Daniel 4 is mentioned at all in that booklet is to help the reader understand that use of “time” to indicate a year. And the only reason this was a great example is because the fulfillment of the prophecy is given in the very same chapter. This way, the reader can see both the prophecy and the fulfillment together in the life of Nebuchadnezzar. Really, read that part again. We explicitly say that the dream was fulfilled in the life of Nebuchadnezzar: “In the historical fulfillment of this dream, it is apparent that the seven years were a period of seven literal years” (emphasis mine). The author of our booklet was, indeed, intelligent, as you suggest – enough so to know that the fulfillment of Daniel 4 is given in Daniel 4.

    So, I’m afraid your fault still stands: Daniel 4 was fulfilled exactly as discussed by Daniel in the verses that immediately follow it. There is no room for your “private interpretation.” I hope you will reread what I wrote above about your misunderstanding of Daniel 4 and that you will look at the bit of evidence I provided for you to start with. I’m sure that you will likely find another reason to support the “1914” date (even in the face of Jeremiah 17:9, hope springs eternal!), but at least it might start you on the path.

    [Now, am I open to the possibility that the prophecy in Daniel 4 might be dual in some way? Perhaps. But I would need a lot more convincing that what your blog provides, and I would need to see Biblical evidence that it should be considered so, not just could be considered so. Big difference. (As someone smarter than me (which, admittedly isn’t too hard) once said: “When the plain sense of scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense.”) And it still would not justify the unbiblical events invented to be attached by some to 1914 to cover the scandal of failed prophetic interpretation.]

    So, rather than shooting myself in the foot, it looks as though me and all ten toes are just fine and all accounted for! 🙂

    (Really, did you read the booklet? You don’t seem to have done so, but I don’t want to assume. Perhaps you did, but did not read very closely, or perhaps your reading was effected by your preconceptions. Regardless, I do ask that you tone down any accusations you make in the future until you have actually been more careful to determine whether or not they have any basis. I don’t mind being accused of something I’ve actually done, but at the very least I expect my accuser to do some minimal fact checking and to know a little more about what he is talking about.)

    As for having no date, I had assumed that you were referring to my blog post. I apologize for the miscommunication, but even in this case: The “date” that we gave in the booklet has nothing to do with the (fictional) events that you and others ascribe to wrongly ascribe to 1914, so how could you disagree with it? It’s apples and oranges, so I’m not sure how you mean you “disagree.” It’s like Bob saying, “My birthday is May 17,” and Harry saying, “I disagree, my birthday is January 30.” I hope this clears things up. We’re talking about a different “seven times” and a different event (the truth or falsity of your understanding of Daniel 4 or 1914, aside).

    Now, might the beginning of WWI 2520 years (again, predicted in Leviticus, not in Daniel) after 603BC be significant in some way? Sure! But if so, there is no need to resort to create fictional and “invisible” heavenly events. The prophetic significance would be consistent with the other events that are attached to that time: the fulfilling of unconditional and previously unfulfilled promises made to Abraham and, therefore, to Israel, just as described in our booklet. And it is certainly true that WWI contributed mightily to the ascent of the British and American peoples. A viewing any footage of Woodrow Wilson’s reception in Europe would attest to that.

    Again, I hope you actually will read and study the entire booklet with your Bible in hand. If you have already done so, then perhaps you need to do so a second time since your mistaken comments show that you didn’t grasp some of the important things we said there. In fact, please feel free to check out all of our literature on Bible prophecy. It’s free for you to order, whether you are trying to understand it or simply attempting to prove it “wrong”!

    I really think the clarity of the instruction in our literature can help you out and help you build rightly on the interest in prophecy you obviously have.

    False accusations aside, thanks again for commenting!

    Best regards,
    Wallace Smith

  8. Hi Mr. Smith,

    As a student of biblical Hebrew, I can certainly verify for you that the Scythian alphabet as listed on the map is derived from the Hebrew alphabet. The mix of ancient and modern forms of the letters is rather peculiar, however — some letters look as if they come from a late stage of paleo-Hebrew, while others are closer to the square script introduced by Ezra (in forms I saw in Jerusalem’s Shrine of the Book, in the Dead Sea Scrolls, in different historical styles). It’s true that both alphabets were used even among the Jews (and the Samaritans for that matter) side by side for quite some time. But this interchange in one alphabet is bizarre to me.

    Still, if the Scythians were not Hebrews themselves (as of course we believe many of them were), then how did they get this peculiar alphabet in the first place?

    שלום – יוחנן רכב

What are you thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s