The Taliban and the Lost Tribes of Israel

According to a report published by Arutz Sheva, scientists at the National Institute of Immunohaematology in Mumbai, India have concluded that a large group of Taliban Muslims may be the descendants of the lost Ten Tribes of Israel. The same report also says that an Israeli rabbinical expert agrees with this view.

The following is an excerpt from the report published by Arutz Sheva:

Rabbi Eliyahu Avichayil, who has dedicated his life to seeking out descendants of the Ten Tribes and bringing them to Israel, says he does not need or trust genetic testing for this purpose: “Rashi’s explanation to Jeremiah 31, 20 implies that the way to identify the Ten Lost Tribes will be via the Jewish customs that they maintain – and in this case, there are many of them.”

Rabbi Avichayil says that the Jewish-like customs that have been found among the Pathans - many of whom are now of the Taliban tribe - include sidelocks, ritual circumcision at eight days, cities of refuge for accidental killers, four-cornered garments, ritual immersion for women, and more. They also practice levirate marriage - not according to Moslem custom, which allows for various relatives of the deceased to marry a widow, whether or not she has children, but rather closer to Jewish custom, in that only brothers can marry only childless-widows.

The very name of the Afridi tribe, of which many members belong to the Taliban, indicates its origin from the Israelite Tribe of Ephraim, Rabbi Avichayil says. “The Pathans, 22 million strong, include not only the Afridic tribe, some 7.5 million people, but also the Rabanis, the Gadis, the Asheris, etc. – indications that many of them are of the Ten Tribes.”

Rabbi Avichayil says that the return of the remnant of the lost tribes of Israel will be the fulfilment of Jeremiah 31:20. Jeremiah 31:20 says:

“Truly, Ephraim is a dear son to Me,
A child that is dandled!
Whenever I have turned against him,
My thoughts would dwell on him still.
That is why My heart yearns for him;
I will receive him back in love, declares the LORD.”

These words of Yahweh come at the end a lament (Jeremiah 31:18-20) in which Ephraim is lamenting its sin which caused its exile away from its native land:

Indeed I heard Ephraim pleading:
You disciplined me, and I took the discipline;
I was like a calf untrained.
Bring me back, let me come back,
for you are the Lord my God.

In this lament Ephraim confesses having been disciplined by Yahweh. The mention of the discipline imposed on Ephraim may be a reference to the exile of the Northern tribes which occurred in 722 B.C. after the fall of Samaria and the deportation of 27,290 people by Sargon II, king of Assyria.

Ephraim’s cry, “Bring me back, let me come back,” is an appeal to God, imploring his mercy and forgiveness. More than a return from exile, Ephraim is asking to be restored to fellowship with God without which Ephraim will continue to be separated from God and condemned to remain in the land of his exile. Thus, before Ephraim can be restored, God must act, and act he does:

“Truly, Ephraim is a dear son to Me,
A child that is dandled!
Whenever I have turned against him,
My thoughts would dwell on him still.
That is why My heart yearns for him;
I will receive him back in love, declares the LORD.”

The words of Yahweh in Jeremiah 31:20 reveal the depths of divine pathos and the great love the Lord has for Ephraim. God’s words reveal the tender feelings of a father who truly cares for his son. Thus, God’s words about Ephraim reveal that however much Ephraim has sinned against God, God will still remember him because Ephraim is his beloved son.

It is clear that God’s word in Jeremiah 31:20 was spoken to the remnant of the Northern tribes now in exile. An audience today hearing these words of God probably will understand “that on the other side of judgment is a God of grace and mercy waiting expectantly to receive his wayward child back again” (Lundbom, p. 447).

Jack Lundbom, in his commentary on Jeremiah couples Ephraim’s lament in Jeremiah 31:18-20 with Rachel’s lament in Jeremiah 31:15-17. He wrote:

When both poems in vv 18-20 are heard following the poems in vv 15-17, Rachel’s weeping will be balanced by the tearful confession of Ephraim, and it will be understood that Rachel’s sons are not gone but simply languishing in exile. Both laments receive comforting answers, with Yahweh making clear his intention to bring the exiles home and restore them to favor (p. 447).

If these Taliban Muslims are indeed the remnant of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel, then their return to Israel may be the fulfillment of God’s words in Jeremiah 31:20.

Bibliography:

Jack R. Lundbom, Jeremiah 21-36. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2004.


Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Hebrew Bible, Afridi Tribe, Lost Tribes, Old Testament, Jeremiah 31, Taliban

The Fate of the Lost Tribes of Israel

Arnold Ages, in an interesting article published in the Jewish Tribune, discusses what happened to the ten lost tribes of Israel after they were deported by Assyria to other areas of the Assyrian empire.

The following is an excerpt from the article:

One of the most intriguing questions in the Hebrew Bible is what happened to the 10 tribes after the northern kingdom of Israel was sundered and plundered by a succession of Assyrian kings whose names – Sennacherib, Shalmaneser, Sargon and Tiglat-pileser – are attached to the sacking of the territory in the eight century BCE?

Not only did these Assyrian monarchs destroy the infrastructure of the political entity that housed all but the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, they also deported, in successive waves, its entire population base to vaguely identified portions of the Assyrian Empire, some beyond a distant river. According to Zvi Benite, who has studied the question with an almost intimidating thoroughness, the “lostness” of the 10 tribes has become the stuff of mystery, folklore and Messianic speculation.

In proposing an answer to the first conundrum – why deport people in the first place? – Benite suggests that the vastness of the Assyrian realm permitted its rulers to gather conquered peoples into its different spaces and use them to consolidate their hold on the empire while granting the deportees a modicum of independence and identity. This thesis, however, stands on some pretty thin gruel. Conquered and deported nations do not generally blend in and become supporters of the regime or empire that carted them off from their native lands.

Be that as it may, Benite’s study does not rest on the questionable idea that the lost tribes somehow serviced the imperial aims of the Assyrians. The quality of his essay resides in the way in which the idea of the ten lost tribes became part of the religious folklore of the Jewish people. In illustrating this, the author ferrets out every last verse of the Hebrew Bible in alluding to the anticipation with which Biblical authors awaited the return of the tribes. The books of Kings, Isaiah and Ezra are especially targeted to place in relief the contemporary view of the fate of the 10 tribes.

According to Benite, the return of the inhabitants of Judea from Babylon and their reconstruction of the Great Temple of Jerusalem sharpened interest in the following question. If Cyrus, the Persian monarch and successor to the Assyrian Empire, decided to return the captives of Judea to their ancestral homeland, how is it that the 10 tribes did not somehow return at the same time as the Judeans? No definitive answer to that question was found.

I have written several posts dealing with the fate of the ten lost tribes of Israel. You can read some of my posts here, here, and here.

To read my evaluation of Zvi Ben-Dor Benite’s book The Lost Tribes of Israel: A World History, click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Assyrian Deportation, Lost Tribes, Northern Kingdom

The Myth of British-Israelism

On August 9, 2006, I wrote a post, “America and Great Britain in Biblical Prophecy,” in which I explained the reasons the movement popularly known as British-Israelism finds no support in the Bible or in history, even though their proponents quote widely from the Bible and history to prove their point.

In response to my post, a proponent of British-Israelism who refuses to give his or her name and hides his or her identity under the label of “anonymous,” has criticized my post for not presenting a “scrap of evidence against Anglo-Saxon identity with the Ten Tribes.”

A careful reading of my original post will show that I cited several texts from the Old Testament to show that many Israelites from the Northern Kingdom were not deported to Assyria. In fact, after the Assyrians conquered Samaria, the territory of the Northern Kingdom was incorporated into the Assyrian empire and became the Assyrian province of Samerina.

The advocates of British-Israelism believe that the Anglo Saxon people, those living in Great Britain and the United States, are the descendants of the ten lost tribes of the Northern Kingdom that were taken into exile by the Assyrians. Thus, the Anglo Saxon people are the direct descendants of the children of Abraham and as such, they become the inheritors of the promises God made to Israel.

The basic argument for British-Israelism has been developed by many authors in England and in the United States. A forceful presentation of this view was presented by Herbert W. Armstrong in his book The United States and Britain in Prophecy. Armstrong was the founder of the Church of God. These are some of the basic beliefs of British-Israelism:

1. The people living in Great Britain and the United States are the descendants of the lost tribes.
2. The British throne is a continuation of the throne of David.
3. The British Royal family are lineal descendants of David, King of Judah.
4. The stone of Scone is the one which Jacob anointed with oil.
5. The British Empire people are the covenant people.
6. The British people are chosen of God to dominate the world.

There are several issues that mitigate against the argument put forth by the proponents of British-Israelism, the view that Great Britain and the United States are the remnant of the lost tribes of Israel. I do not have the time nor the inclination to address every misinterpretation in Armstrong’s book. Suffice it to say that the interpretations are based on eisegesis, literalism, and texts interpreted out of context. In this post, I will address three issues raised by the adherents of British-Israelism.

The Tribes of Israel

Since my anonymous critic asked me to answer some of his questions, I asked him to make a list and name the ten tribes that were lost. Here is the list he provided:

The Southern Kingdom: Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin plus a few faithful Levites.

The Northern Kingdom: Reuben, Levi, Gad, Dan, Ephraim, Manasseh, Isaachar (sic), Napthali (sic), Zebulun, and Asher.

The list of the twelve tribes of Israel appears about twenty times in the Old Testament and once in the New Testament. However, the names of the tribes that compose the twelve tribes of Israel vary from list to list.

The list of the tribes appears for the first time in Genesis 29:31-30:24 in the order in which the children were born. Since Benjamin was born in the land of Canaan, Dinah appears as the twelfth child of Jacob. This is the only time in the Old Testament in which the tribes are listed in the order of their birth. In the twenty lists where the names of the tribes appear, there are eighteen different orders in which the tribes are mentioned.

In some lists, Levi is counted as one of the twelve tribes, in some others Levi does not appear. When Levi is omitted, the tribe of Joseph appears as two tribes: Ephraim and Manasseh.

In Revelation 7:4-8 John provides a list “of every tribe of the sons of Israel”: Judah, Reuben, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benjamin. In this list, the tribes of Dan and Ephraim are missing. The tribe of Joseph represents the tribe of Ephraim.

In the blessing of Moses in Deuteronomy 36:6-29, the following tribes appear: Reuben, Judah, Levi, Benjamin, Ephraim and Manasseh, Zebulun, Gad, Dan, Naphtali. This list contains only 10 tribes; the tribes of Simeon and Asher are missing.

In 1 Kings 11:31-32, only eleven tribes appear. In Judges 5:14-18 there are 11 tribes: Ephraim, Benjamin, Machir, Zebulun, Issachar, Reuben, Gilead, Dan, Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali. Manasseh is missing. Simeon, Judah, and Levi are also missing. It is possible that the Southern tribes (Simeon and Judah) were not yet part of the confederation of the tribes. In Ezekiel 48 the following tribes are listed: Dan, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Ephraim, Reuben, Judah, Benjamin, Simeon, Issachar, Zebulun, and Gad. When the Levites are included, there are thirteen tribes.

All these variations in the listing of the tribes indicate that the number twelve was an artificial arrangement that was also found in other groups outside of Israel. There were the twelve tribes of Nahor (Genesis 22:20-24), the twelve tribes of Ishmael (Genesis 17:20; 25:13-16), and the twelve tribes of Esau (Genesis 36:9-14; 40-43).

The idea of ten tribes presupposes that the Southern Kingdom was composed of only two tribes. However, my reader acknowledges that the Southern Kingdom had three tribes.

In 1 Kings 12:20 we read: “And when all Israel heard that Jeroboam had returned, they sent and called him to the assembly and made him king over all Israel. There was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.” This verse says that there were only eleven tribes (the ten tribes plus Judah), since only Judah followed the house of David. However, in 1 Kings 12:21 we read: “When Rehoboam came to Jerusalem, he assembled all the house of Judah, and the tribe of Benjamin, a hundred and eighty thousand chosen warriors, to fight against the house of Israel, to restore the kingdom to Rehoboam the son of Solomon.” Since the tribe of Benjamin followed the tribe of Judah, then the Northern Kingdom had only nine tribes.

2 Chronicles 11:14, says: “For the Levites left their suburbs and their possession, and came to Judah and Jerusalem: for Jeroboam and his sons had cast them off from executing the priest’s office unto the Lord.” Since the Levites left the Northern Kingdom to come to Judah, now the Northern Kingdom had only eight tribes.

In addition, 2 Chronicles 11:16 reads: “And after them out of all the tribes of Israel such as set their hearts to seek the Lord God of Israel came to Jerusalem, to sacrifice unto the Lord God of their fathers.” This means that many citizens of the North who were faithful Yahwist came to Judah rather than live in the North. In 2 Chronicles 15:8-9 we read about the existence of the tribes of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Simeon. And Simeon is counted as a tribe from Israel.

The Population of the Northern Kingdom

The second factor is the number of people from the Northern Kingdom who were deported to Assyria. My anonymous critic says that the population of the Northern Kingdom was “5 million people” and “probably a lot more.” But this embellished number is contradicted by the archaeological evidence.

Adam Zertal, in his article “The Province of Samaria (Assyrian Samerina) in the Late Iron Age (Iron Age III),” published in Judah and the Judeans in the Neo-Babylonian Period, edited by Oded Lipschitz and Joseph Blenkinsopp (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2003), p. 385, wrote concerning the people from the North who came to worship in Jerusalem (Jeremiah 41:5):

The fact that organized communities of Israelites still saw Jerusalem as their holy place may be interpreted as evidence of the existence of the Yahwistic cult as the main faith in the North, some 150 years after the conquest of Samaria. The archaeological data seem to support this idea, that in spite of the population changes, most of the people remained Israelite in faith. Even if the number of exiled people from Samaria by the Assyrians (approximately 27,000) is reliable, it still did not exceed 20-25% of the Israelite population.

Zertal estimated the population of the Northern Kingdom at the time of the Assyrian conquest to be no more than 100,000, probably 70,000 people. Thus, the population of the Northern Kingdom was smaller than anonymous said it was. But the fact is that many of the inhabitants of the Northern Kingdom remained behind. Some of them fled to the Southern Kingdom, as the archaeological evidence demonstrates. Some of them went to Egypt where they organized a large Jewish community, and some of them eventually became the Samaritan people.

There were never ten lost tribes so far as the Bible is concerned, only a dispersion of many Israelites throughout the whole ancient Near East. In fact the 27,000 people carried by the Assyrians into captivity represented only a small fraction of the total population at the time of the fall of Samaria in 722 B.C.

Under Ezra and Nehemiah about 50,000 people returned from Babylon. This is how the Chronicler described the settlement of the people who returned from exile: “Now the first inhabitants that dwelt in their possessions in their cities were, the Israelites, the priests, Levites, and the Nethinims. And in Jerusalem dwelt of the children of Judah, and of the children of Benjamin, and of the children of Ephraim, and Manasseh” (1 Chronicles 9:2-3).

According to the Chronicler, among those tribes that returned from Babylon were people from Ephraim and Manasseh, and they lived in Jerusalem. In addition, the Chronicler makes a distinction between the Israelites and the Judeans who lived in Jerusalem. Thus, the Biblical record indicates that a remnant from all of the tribes returned. The reference to “all Israel” appears in Ezra 1:3; 2:70; 3:11; 6:17, 21; 7:6, 13, 28; 8:25, 35; 10:5 and in Nehemiah 7:73; 8:1, 17; 9:2; 10:33; 11:20; 12:47; 13:3, 18, 26. Thus, according to Ezra and Nehemiah, “all Israel” was not lost.

The Mission of Jeremiah

After the fall of Jerusalem, Jeremiah was taken by force to Egypt. According to the proponents of British-Israelism, Jeremiah, in carrying out his mission as assigned by God, left Egypt and took two princesses of Judah, the daughters of King Zedekiah, to Spain where the younger princess got married. Then, Jeremiah took Zedekiah’s older daughter to Ireland. In Ireland, the older daughter of Zedekiah married the ruler of Ireland. Thus, through Zedekiah’s daughter, the line of David on the throne of Judah was maintained and continues to this day through the British royal family.

This view is contradicted by the Biblical evidence. The line of David was continued through Jehoiachin and not through Zedekiah. Although Jehoiachin was a captive in Babylon, he was still recognized as the legitimate successor to the throne of David (cf. Jeremiah 52:31-34). According to the Weidner Tablets (ANET, 308), Jehoiachin lived in the Babylonian court and the Babylonian king made provisions “for Jehoiachin, the king of the land of Judah and for the five sons of the king of the land of Judah.”

According to the prophet Haggai, the post-exilic community considered making Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel and Jehoiachin’s grandson, a king in Judah, before he was probably forced to return to Persia (Haggai 2:23). In addition, the genealogy of Christ in Matthew 1:12-16 traces the royal line through Jehoiachin and not through Zedekiah’s daughter.

In his article on “British-Israelism and Pyramidology,” Interpretation 11 (1957), p. 318, Carl Howie wrote:

It is unfortunate that well-meaning people have become dupes of a chauvinistic egotism which substitutes an earthly throne for that which Christ alone can occupy and substitutes an earthly empire for the Kingdom of God. The thought that God’s Kingdom is coextensive with an earthly empire and that the throne of England is the seat of this rule, is abhorrent to all who are acquainted with the profundity of the kingdom and Messiah concepts. That the Kingdom of God is spiritual and not physical is axiomatic and that the church, as it is true to Christ by faith, is the Israel of faith is equally sure (cf. I Peter 2:9-10). To make God the servant and supporter of racism such as the Anglo-Israel movement does directly contradicts both the spirit and letter of the Bible. On the basis of overwhelming evidence we conclude that the British-Israel hypothesis has no basis in fact since no legitimate evidence has been found for its support.

In his article on “Anglo-Israelism,” published in the Jewish Encyclopedia, Joseph Jacobs wrote:

Altogether, by the application of wild guesswork about historical origins and philological analogies, and by a slavishly literal interpretation of selected phrases of prophecy, a case was made out for the identification of the British race with the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel sufficient to satisfy uncritical persons desirous of finding their pride of race confirmed by Holy Scripture. The whole theory rests upon an identification of the word "isles" in the English version of the Bible unjustified by modern philology, which identifies the original word with "coasts" or "distant lands" without any implication of their being surrounded by the sea. Modern ethnography does not confirm in any way the identification of the Irish with a Semitic people; while the English can be traced back to the Scandinavians, of whom there is no trace in Mesopotamia at any period of history. English is a branch of the Aryan stock of languages, and has no connection with Hebrew. The whole movement is chiefly interesting as a reductio ad absurdum of too literal an interpretation of the prophecies.

Although my anonymous reader many never agree with my conclusion, the fact is that British Israelism is based on a biased interpretation of the text, eisegesis, wishful thinking, and a lack of reliable historical evidence. The view that Great Britain and the United States of America are the lost tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh is just a myth.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: British-Israelism, Ephraim , Lost Tribes, Manasseh, Zedekiah

The Jews of China and the Lost Tribes of Israel

According to YnetNews, a group of Chinese Jews living in Kaifeng may be the descendants of Jews who came to China from Persian and Iraqi. Some scholars have identified them with a remnant of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. Others, believe that their presence in China is a fulfillment of Isaiah 49:12.

The following are excerpts from the article published in YnetNews:

However, a thousand years ago, Kaifeng was the capital of the Chinese empire, the largest, richest and most advanced in the world at the time, with 600,000 residents that made it the most populated city on earth.

Ancient Kaifeng had a Jewish community – a small but thriving one, whose story is unique in the history of the Jewish people. For the 800 years of its existence, Kaifeng's Jews never suffered from persecution or discrimination. The Chinese authorities, as well as the general population, welcomed their Jewish neighbors, viewed them as citizens in every respect and allowed them to observe their religion with complete freedom.

It is not clear when exactly the first Jews came to China or when the Jewish community in Kaifeng was formed. In the prophecy of the redemption in the book of Isaiah it states: "See, they will come from afar – some from the north, some from the west, some from the region of Sinim ("Chinese")" (Isaiah, 49:12); but biblical scholars agree that the verse does not speak of China per se. Some claim that the Jews of Kaifeng are descendents of the Ten Lost Tribes. Others theorize that they came to China in the second century following the downfall of the Jews in the Bar Kokhva revolt (132-135CE).

DNA testing done over the past few years on the descendents of the Kaifeng Jews, proved them distant relatives of Armenian, Iranian and Iraqi Jews. Most of the researchers, as well as the Kaifeng descendents themselves, tend to suggest that the original Jews in China were merchants from Persia that came by way of the Silk Route (in today's southern Turkey) to the city of Xian in central China.

Historical references and archaeological findings have proven that the Persian Jews first arrive in China in the eighth century; and since the long, difficult journey made family life difficult, the solution was to establish a permanent base in China. The location of choice was Kaifeng – China's capital from 927BC to 1127AD.

There has been much speculation about the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. Several claims have been made about the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. I have written several posts discussing other claims about the Ten Lost Tribes. If you are interested in knowing more about these claims, check here, here, here, here, and here. I do not give much credence to this claim of the Jews of China in the same way I have been skeptical about previous claims.


Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: China, Israel, Jews, Lost Tribes

The Jews from India: The Tribe of Manasseh is Found

On September 19, 2005, I wrote a post about the Mizo Jews from India who claimed to be the descendants of the lost Tribe on Manasseh. In that post, I wrote:

Are the Mizo Jews the descendants of the lost tribe of Manasseh? Jewish scholars are divided over the claims of the Bnei Menashe. A report by an anthropologist claiming that there are similarities between the rituals of the Jewish people prescribed in Leviticus and the cultic practices of the Mizo Jews has provided a ray of hope for those who claim that the Mizo Jews are one of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel.

Read that post, “Found: A Lost Tribe of Israel,” by clicking here.

This week, several of the Bnei Manashe have returned to Israel. In an article published today in the Arutz Sheva, many more Mizo Jews will be making their “Aliyah” (Jewish immigration to Israel) in the next few months.

The following is an excerpt from the news report:

Seventy-eight members of India's Bnei Menashe community entered Israel by bus from Jordan on Thursday and 40 more were scheduled to arrive at Ben-Gurion Airport early Friday morning on an El Al flight from Mumbai (Bombay), according to Shavei Israel Chairman Michael Freund, whose organization organized the operation.

The Bnei Menashe claim descent from the tribe of Menashe, one of the ten tribes exiled from the Land of Israel by the Assyrian empire over 2,700 years ago. They reside primarily in the two Indian states of Mizoram and Manipur, along the border with Burma and Bangladesh. In recent years alone, over 800 members of the community have made Aliyah, thanks largely to the efforts of Shavei Israel, a Jerusalem-based group that reaches out and assists “lost Jews” seeking to return to the Jewish people. They reside mainly in Kiryat Arba, south of Jerusalem, and Beit El and Ofrah, north of Jerusalem.

The existence of the Bnei Menashe, known in India as the Manmassi tribe, was publicized in the Jewish world about 30 years ago by Rabbi Eliyahu Avichayil. When it was observed that the tribe's members maintained certain ancient traditions unlike any observed in the Indian subcontinent, investigation revealed that the rituals were of Jewish origin

The prophets often mentioned that the scattered people would be regathered and return to their land. For instance, Deutero Isaiah said: “Do not fear, for I am with you; I will bring your offspring from the east, and from the west I will gather you; I will say to the north, ‘Give them up,’ and to the south, ‘Do not withhold; bring my sons from far away and my daughters from the end of the earth’” ( Isaiah 43:5-6). The prophet Ezekiel said: “I will take you from the nations, and gather you from all the countries, and bring you into your own land” (Ezekiel 36:24).

During the past century, millions of Jews have returned to Israel. They came from the east and from the west. They came from the north and now they are coming from the south. It seems that the prophetic dream is being fulfilled: Jews are coming back “from the ends of the earth.”

My only question is: are the Mizo Jews members of the lost tribe of Manasseh?

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Aliyah, Lost Tribes, Mizo Jews

Found: A Lost Tribe of Israel

A few weeks ago, a group of people who live in Mizoram, a state located in the north-east section of India, bordering Burma and Bangladesh, went through a process of conversion and because Jews. The process of conversion included a ritual bath known as the Mikvah, circumcision for the men, and the recitation of the Shema: “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).

The population of Mizoram is about 800,000 people. Most of them are Christians, but there are 5,000-8,000 people who claim to be Jews. According to their claim, they are the descendants of the lost tribe of Manasseh. They call themselves Bnei Menashe or “the Children of Manasseh.” These Mizo Jews say their ancestors were deported by the Assyrians at the time of the conquest of the Northern Kingdom.

The deportation of the ten tribes that formed the Northern Kingdom of Israel is a fact. When Tiglath-pileser III became king of Assyria in 745 B. C., he established a policy of permanent conquest. Assyria reinforced this policy with brutal reprisal in case of revolts. The king of Assyria carried out the policy of total conquest by means of violence, pain, and suffering. At the beginning of his reign, Tiglath-pileser reintroduced the policy of mass deportation. The policy of mass deportation would force the conquered people to move in large numbers to other parts of the empire. The aim of deportation was to prevent the possibility of internal revolt by the vanquished people.

In order to confront the threat posed by the imperialistic dreams of Tiglath-pileser, the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Arameans (Syria) formed an alliance to fight against the Assyrians. Ahaz, king of Judah, was invited to join the coalition, but he refused.

Because of Ahaz’s refusal to join the alliance to fight against Assyria, the joint armies of Israel and Syria besieged Jerusalem with the intent of deposing Ahaz and placing on the throne of Judah another person who would be willing to fight the Assyrians.

Ahaz, in panic, sent messengers to Tiglath-pileser asking for military help. He paid a tribute to Assyria by using the gold and silver from the temple and from the royal treasury, and asked for military assistance. In response to Ahaz's invitation, Tiglath-pileser came to Palestine to help Judah.

Tiglath-pileser invaded Syria, killed Rezin, king of the Arameans, and deported the people of Syria to Kir (2 Kings 16:8-9). Tiglath-pileser also conquered several cities in Galilee and Naphtali, deporting some of the people to Assyria. The Bible says: “In the days of King Pekah of Israel, King Tiglath-pileser of Assyria came and captured Ijon, Abel-beth-maacah, Janoah, Kedesh, Hazor, Gilead, and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali; and he carried the people captive to Assyria” ( 2 Kings 15:29). As for the tribe of Manasseh, the Bible says: “So the God of Israel stirred up the spirit of Pul king of Assyria (that is, Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria), who took the Reubenites, the Gadites and the half-tribe of Manasseh into exile. He took them to Halah, Habor, Hara and the river of Gozan, where they are to this day” (1 Chronicle 5:26).

Several years after the death of his father, Shalmaneser V, the son of Tiglath-pileser conquered all the cities of the Northern Kingdom. He then besieged Samaria, the capital of the Northern Kingdom, for three years. Just before Samaria fell to Assyria, Shalmaneser V was killed in battle.

With the death of Shalmaneser, Sargon II, his brother, became king of Assyria. Sargon finished the conquest of Samaria in 722 B.C. and deported 27,290 inhabitants to other parts of the Assyrian empire. The Bible says: “In the ninth year of Hoshea the king of Assyria captured Samaria; he carried the Israelites away to Assyria. He placed them in Halah, on the Habor, the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes” (2 Kings 17:6).

After the people of Israel arrived in Assyria, families and clans were scattered throughout the empire and from this point on they moved from place to place and apparently lost contact with each other through assimilation into Assyrian culture. The disappearance of these deported people gave rise to the legend of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel.

The concept of the “Lost Ten Tribes of Israel” is very controversial. The basic idea refers to the disappearance of the ten tribes of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. The people who lived in the cities of Israel and the inhabitants of Samaria, its capital, were deported to different parts of the Assyrian empire and blended in with other people and cultures present in Assyrian society and then disappeared from the pages of history.

Over the years, many groups have made claims that they are the remnants of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel. Among these are some tribal people of Afghanistan, the Jews of the Sahara, and some people in China, Egypt, and Iran.

In this country, Herbert W. Armstrong, the founder of the Radio Church of God, believed that the Anglo-Saxons, the Scandinavians, and the Germanic peoples are the living descendants of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel. The Mormon Church, also known as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, believes that the restoration of the Ten Lost Tribes will be in North America. The 10th article of the Mormon’s Articles of Faith states: “We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon this continent [the Americas].”

Are the Mizo Jews the descendants of the lost tribe of Manasseh? Jewish scholars are divided over the claims of the Bnei Menashe. A report by an anthropologist claiming that there are similarities between the rituals of the Jewish people prescribed in Leviticus and the cultic practices of the Mizo Jews has provided a ray of hope for those who claim that the Mizo Jews are one of the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel.

Genetic studies have not demonstrated a link between the Mizo Jews and the Jews of Israel. Both the Mitochondrial DNA, passed from mother to child, and the Y-chromosomal Aaron, the supposed chromosome that all descendants of Aaron should share, have not established an ethnic relationship between the two groups.

As for the claims of the Mizo Jews, the decision has been made. The Chief Rabbinate of Israel has declared that the people who live in Mizoram and claim to be descendants of the tribe of Manasseh are indeed the lost tribe of Manasseh.

The rabbinical court has given its blessing to the claims of the Mizo Jews. The process of conversion is complete and now, under the laws of return, these new Jews will soon immigrate to Israel and, for the first time in 3,000 years, enjoy the blessing of living in the Promised Land.

The lost tribe of Manasseh has been found. Or so they say!

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Children of Manasseh, Herbert Armstrong, Lost Tribes, Mizoram, Mizo Jews