True Feminism - by a Bible-reading lady

[bible_student]

Every follower of a religious cult leader could type something similar to what you just did.

Again John Anthony Hill is not Jesus, he did not descend from Heaven.
Jesus Himself, not a reincarnated man claiming to be a Christ.

The angels said this to the apostles, factual LITERAL statement, not a metaphor, no hidden meanings:

Acts 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

As has been explained, this event is yet future, when Father puts The Lord back down on the Mount of Olives.

Zechariah
14:3 Then shall the "I AM" go forth, and fight against those nations, like when He fought in the day of battle (Revelation 12:7).
14:4 And his feet shall stand in that Day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the East, and the Mt. of Olives shall split in half towards the East and towards the West, and there shall be an enormous valley; and half of the Mount of Olives shall move towards the North, and half of it towards the South.
14:5 And ye shall flee to the valley of My mountains; when he shall touch the valley of the mountain at the place he separated: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the "I AM" my God shall come, [and] all the holy ones with Him.

 

[Lisa]

Understood, no pressure.

Then maybe you'd like to read the true story about the much loved God-fearing woman: the daughter of the last king of Judah, who escaped Jerusalem's fall in 588BC as an 18 year old with Jeremiah the Prophet, via Egypt, Gibraltar, Spain, England and then to Ireland, where she became its queen (and of Gibraltar), and is the real flesh and blood Britannia. Fully British with black hair and blue eyes, like Ireland's Corrs.

She wrote a phenomenal autobiography about her life's story, all in the most beautiful rhyming verse: definitely God inspired.

There's a 2 page PDF here giving a summary of it, which is actually an invitation for a movie financier, because it's such an epic blockbuster story.

JAH has located her burial site to The Hill of Tara Ireland, which He is seeking Irish government permission to dig up her bones, and He says the Ark of the Covenant is there too, because they brought it from Jerusalem, and buried it with her, and He's identified the prophecies about her in Nostrodamus.

The establishment don't want these truths to come out, because it will show them up for who they really are, and they will be very embarrassed. But unfortunately for them it's defiitely going to happen.

I’m not interested in your jah stuff, I’m not impressed with false teachers and what they offer. I’ll stick to the Bible thanks.

 

[Phithx]

I’m not interested in your jah stuff, I’m not impressed with false teachers and what they offer. I’ll stick to the Bible thanks.

 

[Camidria]

Nie ons eie werke nie, maar Sy werke in ons en deur ons. Dis alles Sy werke.
Onthou ook, dat ons praat nou hier van mense. Om God te vrees (gesonde respek) is inderdaad `n baie goeie ding en baie goeie (en realistiese) plek vir ware geloof om te begin. Kyk maar net om jou, daar is `n groot tekort aan Godvresende mense. God is Goed en Regverdig, so om Hom te vrees (gesonde respek) is inderdaad baie goed vir ons (as mense) en so vir mense, is dit die begin. Spreuke (Proverbs) praat heewat hiervan.

Proverbs
1:7 The fear of the "I AM" [is] the beginning of Knowledge: [but] fools despise Wisdom and instruction.
1:29 Because they hated Knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the "I AM":
2:5 Then shalt thou understand the fear of the "I AM", and find the Knowledge of God.
etc.

Yes I know that, it is never our works if we are in a relationship with God, I agree that is is healthy to have a reverent fear for God, to want to obey Him because we love Him but also because we want to do the right thing out of a awe for Him. In the book that we use in our one to ones the first chapter is Lordship, it teaches you the importance of obeying God, out of respect and out of love, to do what He says in the Word...

But I am not talking about this intricate relationship when I say (I am translating now for the others)

A relationship with Jesus born of fear is not a true relationship, God will one day test our hearts and if our relationship does not come from a place of love but only law and own works, then we also effectively choose against God.

I am talking about a relationship where someone, do not respect of fear God, where they are just in it to go to heaven, and where they only obey His laws because they gain worldly acknowledgement from it, God will test our hearts and motivations, and if people do the 'right' thing for the wrong reasons, that is also wrong.

Sien `n gemeenskap en hoe die gemeenskap veronderstel is om te werk eerder as die idee van "kerk". Ons moet vergeet van die idee van "kerk" en inplaas van dit glo in wat die Bybel en die Here self se oor hoe ons veronderstel is om te leef, dit ook self lees en daagliks strewe om ons lewens reg te leef, soos wat die Byble se.

I agree, we cannot be Sunday Christians, this is what my church or community teaches, the problem I think we have here is the word 'church' when I say church I mean community, a body of believers, but the issue is here between western society vs eastern society. Westerners do not have the same community that easterners do, Easterners are more involved in one another's lives, thus they use the word community instead of church, church is supposed to be a body of believers that gather more than once a week and that hold one another accountable to be obedient to what God has shown individuals to do. So a church is supposed to function more like a community, doing life together as spiritual family - so this is what I mean by church and I think this is where we miss one another, because you perhaps have an idea that I mean an institution like the NG Kerk?

Dis nie vir my om te oordeel nie, net die Here en dis tussen elke persoon en Hom (selfde vir my, selfde vir jou, selfde vir enige iemand anders) want net Hy weet alles en ken ons beter as wat ons onsself ken. Ek's in elk geval meer geneig deesdae (danksy die Here) om eerder iets goeds van `n ander persoon te wil sien of te glo of te hoop, as iets negatiefs. "But, keep you guard up." Wat ons doen is om self die boodskap van TWHOFTF na te streef in ons eie lewens en dit is natuurlik iets wat ons met ander mense wil deel, sodat hulle ook daarvan kan uitvind en leer. Dit is die boodskap van die Bybel en so, om die boodskap aan te stuur is `n natuurlike deel daarvan.

I think that I understand where you are coming from now, and that speaking in our home language made it a bit easier to see each other's motivations and hearts?

My main message that I hope you will see is this, as you can see, and we are starting to agree on some main points here. Many of the people here including myself have a real relationship with God, ingrained in a active prayer life, day to day obedience and living according to God's statutes, we also despise institutions that wants to drag us down, are focused on money, and are preaching dead works that produces Sunday Christians that aren't born again and lives only for pleasure and for how people see them. (aansien en geld)

We do disagree however about John Anthony Hill however. I believe Jesus is still at the right hand of God and will come down on the clouds and that I can talk to Him via the Holy Spirit at any time.
You believe he is already here.
I believe Jesus is God incarnate, son of God and also God.
You believe JAH is Jesus, that he is not God but God's son?

Vrede vir jou

 

[Lisa]

Yes I know that, it is never our works if we are in a relationship with God, I agree that is is healthy to have a reverent fear for God, to want to obey Him because we love Him but also because we want to do the right thing out of a awe for Him. In the book that we use in our one to ones the first chapter is Lordship, it teaches you the importance of obeying God, out of respect and out of love, to do what He says in the Word...

But I am not talking about this intricate relationship when I say (I am translating now for the others)


I am talking about a relationship where someone, do not respect of fear God, where they are just in it to go to heaven, and where they only obey His laws because they gain worldly acknowledgement from it, God will test our hearts and motivations, and if people do the 'right' thing for the wrong reasons, that is also wrong.


I agree, we cannot be Sunday Christians, this is what my church or community teaches, the problem I think we have here is the word 'church' when I say church I mean community, a body of believers, but the issue is here between western society vs eastern society. Westerners do not have the same community that easterners do, Easterners are more involved in one another's lives, thus they use the word community instead of church, church is supposed to be a body of believers that gather more than once a week and that hold one another accountable to be obedient to what God has shown individuals to do. So a church is sopposed to function more like a community, doing life together as spiritual family - so this is what I mean by church and I think this is where we miss one another, because you perhaps have an idea that I mean an institution like the NG Kerk?


I think that I understand where you are coing from now, and that speaking in our home language made it a bit easier to see each other's motivations and hearts?

My main message that I hope you will see is this, as you can see, and we are starting to agree on some main points here. Many of the people here including myself have a real relationship with God, ingrained in a active prayer life, day to day obedience and living according to God's statutes, we also despise institutions that wants to drag us down, are focused on money, and are preaching dead works that produces Sunday Christians that aren't born again and lives only for pleasure and for how people see them. (aansien en geld)

We do disagree however about John Anthony Hill however. I believe Jesus is still at the right hand of god and will come down on the clouds and that I can talk to Him via the Holy Spirit at any time.
You believe he is already here.
I believe Jesus is God incarnate, son of God and also God.
You believe JAH is Jesus, that he is not God but God's son?

Vrede vir jou

Thanks for bringing it back to english.

 

[bible_student]

Yes I know that, it is never our works if we are in a relationship with God, I agree that is is healthy to have a reverent fear for God, to want to obey Him because we love Him but also because we want to do the right thing out of a awe for Him. In the book that we use in our one to ones the first chapter is Lordship, it teaches you the importance of obeying God, out of respect and out of love, to do what He says in the Word...

But I am not talking about this intricate relationship when I say (I am translating now for the others)


I am talking about a relationship where someone, do not respect of fear God, where they are just in it to go to heaven, and where they only obey His laws because they gain worldly acknowledgement from it, God will test our hearts and motivations, and if people do the 'right' thing for the wrong reasons, that is also wrong.


I agree, we cannot be Sunday Christians, this is what my church or community teaches, the problem I think we have here is the word 'church' when I say church I mean community, a body of believers, but the issue is here between western society vs eastern society. Westerners do not have the same community that easterners do, Easterners are more involved in one another's lives, thus they use the word community instead of church, church is supposed to be a body of believers that gather more than once a week and that hold one another accountable to be obedient to what God has shown individuals to do. So a church is supposed to function more like a community, doing life together as spiritual family - so this is what I mean by church and I think this is where we miss one another, because you perhaps have an idea that I mean an institution like the NG Kerk?


I think that I understand where you are coming from now, and that speaking in our home language made it a bit easier to see each other's motivations and hearts?

It seems so, yes.

My main message that I hope you will see is this, as you can see, and we are starting to agree on some main points here. Many of the people here including myself have a real relationship with God, ingrained in a active prayer life, day to day obedience and living according to God's statutes, we also despise institutions that wants to drag us down, are focused on money, and are preaching dead works that produces Sunday Christians that aren't born again and lives only for pleasure and for how people see them. (aansien en geld)

Agreed.

We do disagree however about John Anthony Hill however. I believe Jesus is still at the right hand of God and will come down on the clouds and that I can talk to Him via the Holy Spirit at any time.

Understood.

You believe he is already here.

Yes.

I believe Jesus is God incarnate, son of God and also God.

Understood.

You believe JAH is Jesus, that he is not God but God's son?

I know JAH as Christ in His Second Coming incarnated into a human.

Who is JAH? -
http://JAHTruth.net/mal4.htm

Vrede vir jou

Thank-you. And likewise, peace to you as well.

 

[elsbet]

elsbet said:
John Hall is not Jesus. John Hall is not a Prophet. If he was a Prophet, his words would align with the bible-- but they don't.

That is your opinion, and not a fact.

I can't believe I missed this.

You quoted Matthew 24:27. A little context on that...

​

Matthew 24:26-27​

The Return of the Son of Man
(Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28)​

​

Therefore if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go forth; or ‘Behold, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe.​

​

For just as the lightning comes forth from the east and shines as far as the west (meaning, we will all witness this), so will be the coming of the Son of Man.​

"His advent shall be sudden, universal, unmistakable..."

Spoiler: Every eye shall see...

Verse 27. - As the lightning...east...west.
That is, shines from one end of heaven to the other. St. Chrysostom's comment explains the similitude: "How, then, shineth the lightning? It needs not one to talk of it, it needs not a herald, but even to them in chambers it shows itself in an instant of time throughout the whole world. So shall that coming be, showing itself at once everywhere by reason of the shining forth of his glory." We are told, "every eye shall see him." His advent shall be sudden, universal, unmistakable; in a moment he shall be present, visible in all his power and glory

And we have not seen.

 

[Robin]

I can't believe I missed this.

You quoted Matthew 24:27. A little context on that...

​

Matthew 24:26-27​

The Return of the Son of Man​

(Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28)​

​

Therefore if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go forth; or ‘Behold, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe.​

​

For just as the lightning comes forth from the east and shines as far as the west (meaning, we will all witness this), so will be the coming of the Son of Man.​

"His advent shall be sudden, universal, unmistakable..."

Spoiler: Every eye shall see...

Verse 27. - As the lightning...east...west.
That is, shines from one end of heaven to the other. St. Chrysostom's comment explains the similitude: "How, then, shineth the lightning? It needs not one to talk of it, it needs not a herald, but even to them in chambers it shows itself in an instant of time throughout the whole world. So shall that coming be, showing itself at once everywhere by reason of the shining forth of his glory." We are told, "every eye shall see him." His advent shall be sudden, universal, unmistakable; in a moment he shall be present, visible in all his power and glory

And we have not seen.

 

[bible_student]

I can't believe I missed this.

You quoted Matthew 24:27. A little context on that...

​

Matthew 24:26-27​

The Return of the Son of Man​

(Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28)​

​

Therefore if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go forth; or ‘Behold, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe.​

​

Agreed, but this is not what we are saying to you, though.

​

For just as the lightning comes forth from the east and shines as far as the west (meaning, we will all witness this)

, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.

This is exactly what we are saying (only it should read lightening, not lightning):

Congratulations!
You've just landed at the most ground-breaking and informative site on the Net

"As The Lightening Shineth from the East even unto the West..."

http://JAHTruth.net

"His advent shall be sudden, universal, unmistakable..."

Spoiler: Every eye shall see...

Verse 27. - As the lightning...east...west.
That is, shines from one end of heaven to the other. St. Chrysostom's comment explains the similitude: "How, then, shineth the lightning? It needs not one to talk of it, it needs not a herald, but even to them in chambers it shows itself in an instant of time throughout the whole world. So shall that coming be, showing itself at once everywhere by reason of the shining forth of his glory." We are told, "every eye shall see him." His advent shall be sudden, universal, unmistakable; in a moment he shall be present, visible in all his power and glory

And we have not seen.

Maybe because you are not looking?

P.S. "Lightning" does not shine from the East even unto the West. That's not what lightning does.

But the "Lightening" that shines from one end of heaven to the other (as the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West, lightening the whole world in the process) does.

https://jahtruth.net/mal4.htm

 

[Robin]

​

Agreed, but this is not what we are saying to you, though.

​

​

This is exactly what we are saying (only it should read lightening, not lightning):

Congratulations!
You've just landed at the most ground-breaking and informative site on the Net

"As The Lightening Shineth from the East even unto the West..."

http://JAHTruth.net


Maybe because you are not looking?

P.S. "Lightning" does not shine from the East even unto the West. That's not what lightning does.

But the "Lightening" that shines from one end of heaven to the other (as the Sun rises in the East and sets in the West, lightening the whole world in the process) does.

https://jahtruth.net/mal4.htm

Actually, the correct translation is lightning.

From the Greek astrapé which is the same word used in Luke 10:18 in describing Satan falling like LIGHTNING from the sky.
https://biblehub.com/greek/796.htm


This denotes his coming as being visible to everyone -there will be no confusion or doubt as to his identity.

 

[bible_student]

Actually, the correct translation is lightning.

From the Greek astrapé which is the same word used in Luke 10:18 in describing Satan falling like LIGHTNING from the sky.
https://biblehub.com/greek/796.htm


This denotes his coming as being visible to everyone -there will be no confusion or doubt as to his identity.

No, it is not.

Matthew 24:27 For as the lightening cometh out of the East, and shineth even unto the West; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.

 

[Phithx]

I can't believe I missed this.

You quoted Matthew 24:27. A little context on that...

​

Matthew 24:26-27​

The Return of the Son of Man​

(Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28)​

​

Therefore if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go forth; or ‘Behold, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe.​

​

For just as the lightning comes forth from the east and shines as far as the west (meaning, we will all witness this), so will be the coming of the Son of Man.​

"His advent shall be sudden, universal, unmistakable..."

Spoiler: Every eye shall see...

Verse 27. - As the lightning...east...west.
That is, shines from one end of heaven to the other. St. Chrysostom's comment explains the similitude: "How, then, shineth the lightning? It needs not one to talk of it, it needs not a herald, but even to them in chambers it shows itself in an instant of time throughout the whole world. So shall that coming be, showing itself at once everywhere by reason of the shining forth of his glory." We are told, "every eye shall see him." His advent shall be sudden, universal, unmistakable; in a moment he shall be present, visible in all his power and glory

And we have not seen.

Actually, the correct translation is lightning.

From the Greek astrapé which is the same word used in Luke 10:18 in describing Satan falling like LIGHTNING from the sky.
https://biblehub.com/greek/796.htm


This denotes his coming as being visible to everyone -there will be no confusion or doubt as to his identity.

The original Authorise 1611 king James Bible says otherwise in Matthew 24:27. Proofs at the link.

"Christ’s 2nd Coming – Correctly Described in the Original ‘Authorised’ 1611 king James Bible – Not the Others"

 

[Robin]

No, it is not.

Matthew 24:27 For as the lightening cometh out of the East, and shineth even unto the West; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.

The original Authorise 1611 king James Bible says otherwise in Matthew 24:27.

"Christ’s 2nd Coming – Correctly Described in the Original ‘Authorised’ 1611 king James Bible – Not the Others"

View attachment 29411

Well the original manuscript every English translation is based off of says something different, so . . .

 

[Phithx]

Well the original manuscript every English translation is based off of says something different, so . . .

It sounds like that so-called original manuscript is part of the scam.

Until it's Authorised, like the 1611 is, can we really take it seriously?

The Vatican, amongst others, have had specialist forgers for centuries.

Not that I'm asking you to watch these, but they're very good, if you or anyone is interested.
A Lamp In The Dark - The Untold History Of The Bible ~ Full Documentary

Tares Among the Wheat: Sequel to A Lamp in the Dark

 

[Robin]

It sounds like that so-called original manuscript is part of the scam.

Until it's Authorised, like the 1611 is, can we really take it seriously?

The Vatican, amongst others, have had specialist forgers for centuries.

Not that I'm asking you to watch these, but they're very good, if you or anyone is interested.
A Lamp In The Dark - The Untold History Of The Bible ~ Full Documentary

Tares Among the Wheat: Sequel to A Lamp in the Dark

I've actually seen that documentary . . . But the original manuscripts holds more authority than the translations that came after it.

Edit: in all seriousness what makes you believe an English translation (considering none of the biblical characters even spoke it) has sway over the original Greek manuscript?

 

[Phithx]

I've actually seen that documentary . . . But the original manuscripts holds more authority than the translations that came after it.

Edit: in all seriousness what makes you believe an English translation (considering none of the biblical characters even spoke it) has sway over the original Greek manuscript?

Good question, thank-you.

Primarily because Father will make sure that we have the best version under the circumstances in our present day language.

We: the west - broadly speaking, are true Israel - UNION of (12 Tribes of) JACKob flag, (I)saac's-sons -> Saxons (Gen.21:12), Berith-ish בְּרִית + בְּרִית Hebrew words meaning Covenant-men, and more.

The Greeks of then were mostly Tribe of Dan, as far as I can make out, who are now the Irish, Scandinavians generally, and many in USA.

So, when in doubt, like potentially with this issue, revert to the Authorised version. But agreed original texts will provide clues; but one has to hope that they are actual originals.

King of kings' Bible Isaiah 28:11 For with succinct lips and another language (English) will He speak to this people.

 

[bible_student]

Well the original manuscript every English translation is based off of says something different, so . . .

Hi Robin,

Lightning does not shine from the East even unto the West.

However, the lightening of the rising sun, does.

Just like the (en-)Lightening of the Sun of Righteousness, Who according to the Scripture, comes to Enlighten the whole world:

Malachi 4:2 But unto you that fear My name shall the Sun of Righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.

Matthew 24:27 For as the lightening cometh out of the East, and shineth even unto the West; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.

Peace be upon you.

 

[Robin]

Hi Robin,

Lightning does not shine from the East even unto the West.

However, the lightening of the sun does (just like the Lightening of the Sun of Righteousness, Who comes to enlighten the world's spiritual darkness).

Malachi 4:2 But unto you that fear My name shall the Sun of Righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.

Peace be upon you.

Thanks for answering. My contention here is that original Greek does not make an allowance for the translation of "lightening" as opposed to "lightning". As I said earlier, you can check to see that the same word was used to describe Satan's fall - the implication is a sudden, bright and unmistakable flash. And seeing as English was not the language spoken by any of the prophets, disciples or apostles I think cross-checking the original word is more accurate than using an interpretation gleaned only from a translated English copy. Dont you agree?

Good question, thank-you.

Primarily because Father will make sure that we have the best version under the circumstances in our present day language.

We: the west - broadly speaking, are true Israel - UNION of (12 Tribes of) JACKob flag, (I)saac's-sons -> Saxons (Gen.21:12), Berith-ish בְּרִית + בְּרִית Hebrew words meaning Covenant-men, and more.

The Greeks of then were mostly Tribe of Dan, as far as I can make out, who are now the Irish, Scandinavians generally, and many in USA.

So, when in doubt, like with this issue, revert to the Authorised version. But agreed original texts will provide clues; but one has to hope that they are actual originals.

King of kings' Bible Isaiah 28:11 For with succinct lips and another language (English) will He speak to this people.

Thanks for replying. So which text was the authorized version based on? Is there any proof of English being the language spoken of in Isaiah? Oh and I do have a question about the British being true Israel: A journey from Assyria to England would have been exceedingly difficult in ancient times, especially for a large number of people. Geographically speaking, Afghan-Israelism and even Japanese-Israelism have a greater possibility of truth. Further, why would Assyria, or later Babylon, or later Persia allow the Israelites to migrate outside of their territories? Further, if the Israelites had the ability to migrate, why would they travel to Europe / England instead of back to their ancestral homeland? So, while it is possible that some Israelites migrated to Europe / England, it is highly unlikely that this occurred to any significant degree. I would be open to seeing any affirming geographical or historical evidence you could show me though?

 

[bible_student]

Thanks for answering. My contention here is that original Greek does not make an allowance for the translation of "lightening" as opposed to "lightning". As I said earlier, you can check to see that the same word was used to describe Satan's fall - the implication is a sudden, bright and unmistakable flash. And seeing as English was not the language spoken by any of the prophets, disciples or apostles I think cross-checking the original word is more accurate than using an interpretation gleaned only from a translated English copy. Dont you agree?

You're welcome, and likewise thank you for your reply. Understood. If you look at the original 1611 kJV Bible translation, then you will see that the translators (all of them - because, they all cross-checked one another's work) chose the word "lightening" and not lightning.

I'm not personally a Greek expert. However, I can tell just from reading the sentence, that "lightning" does not fit in the sentence. Because, if you just read and focus on the sentence that Jesus is speaking:

"For as the lightening cometh out of the East, and shineth even unto the West; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be."

Lightning? Does lightning come out of the East? Why would Jesus say that unless He was not speaking of lightning but of the lightening (of the Sun, which comes out of the East as we all know; and shines even unto the West).

Could it be that the Greek word can be used for both? Whatever the case, looking at the sentence itself, that Jesus is speaking, as well as comparing it to the prophetic statement about Christ in Malachi (Christ is the "Sun of Righteousness") shows that (in order to make clear/fit with the meaning in English) "lightening" has to be the correct word for the verse in Matthew.

Perhaps the translators of the 1611 kJ A.V. also were aware of the prophecy in Malachi, but however they came to the conclusion, they agreed upon and used the word "lightening" (which fits both ways - syntax of the sentence, as well as prophetically - and therefore it makes sense) instead of lightning (which does not).

I don't know what their reasons were, but they chose it for the Authorised Version, and it makes sense.

 

[bible_student]

@Robin

If interested, then I would like to invite you to have a look at some of the info presented in this thread:

Twelve Tribes Of Israel Info & Research Thread
https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/twelve-tribes-of-israel-info-research-thread.5480/

There are several videos (including about historical evidence), etc. if delving into the subject interests you.


P.S. A recent clue was discovering how in the Scots language, people will say "the day" instead of today, and "the night" instead of tonight (which is also how you say it in Hebrew and Arabic).

Ireland is also called Hibernia (which means Hebrew's New Land)

The Iberian Peninsula (not the "Spanish" peninsula - why?)
Iberian means Eberian (i.e. Hebrew)