Armostrongism (considere derogatory by its followers) is the teachings of Hebert W. Armstrong, a swill of Jehovah's Witness, Mormonism, and Adventism. Armstrong was a pyramidologist and British Israelist, his British Israelism he did not get from the Adventists or Jehovah's Witnesses but possibly the Mormons or even Freemasons. Armstrong was a follower of Seiss who was not a British Israelist but who believed that once the Jews converted to Christianity in Israel that they would still maintain a special place in the Millenium Kingdom. Armstrong was also anti-Trinitarian. It is hard to trace Armstrong's British Israelist pyramidology, was it from Freemasons or Mormons or somewhere else, maybe Smyth, time will tell hopefully. Did he believe the Jews would remain special like Seiss?
Armstrongism a mix of Adventism, Jehovah's Witness, and Mromosnism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrongism#Controversies
Armstrongism is defined as a cult in Walter Martin's book, The Kingdom of the Cults (1965). Martin argues that Armstrong's teachings are largely a conglomerate of teachings from other groups, noting similarities in elements of his teachings to the Seventh-day Adventists (sabbatarianism, annihilationism, and their belief in the soul stays asleep until the body resurrection), Jehovah's Witnesses (which is different from the mainstream Christian belief that the soul stays awake and immediately goes to either Heaven or Hell instantly following death), and Mormonism (God Family doctrine).[13]
Joseph Seiss believed that Jews would convert to Christianity in the end but as the descendants of Jews would be special in some way.
Joseph Seisse's A Miracle In Stone, Or The Great Pyramid Of Egypt
Armstrom was influence by Seiss
https://armstronginstitute.org/709-job-and-the-great-pyramid
Job and the Great Pyramid
Have you heard the theory that the biblical Job built the Great Pyramid?
By Christopher Eames • June 18, 2022
t’s one of the most incredible structures on planet Earth—and it has stood so for thousands of years. It’s the only one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World that is still intact. Made of nearly 2.5 million blocks of stone, the Great Pyramid of Giza (otherwise known as the “Pyramid of Khufu,” or simply the “Great Pyramid”) weighs in at roughly 6 million tons. Yet for such a gargantuan structure, the structural precision is breathtaking. Stone is laid against stone with knife-edge precision. The pyramid is aligned to “True North” with an accuracy of 0.05 degrees—such accuracy that compasses can be checked against it. With each side of the base measuring 230 meters long, and a height of 147 meters, this behemoth of a structure, while no longer the tallest building on Earth, remains one of the top three heaviest on the planet.
The 19th century author Josephus Augustus Seiss summarizes some of these remarkable details about the pyramid in his 1877 work A Miracle in Stone: The Great Pyramid of Egypt. “[W]e find [in the Great Pyramid] … a perfect geometric figure, so framed that the four sides of its base bear the same proportion to its vertical height as the circumference of a circle to its radius ….” Further, “[t]here is perhaps no much better test of a sound, practical astronomy, than to be able to determine truly the four cardinal points. …
Tycho Brahe’s celebrated Uranibourg observatory is faulty in orientation to five minutes of a degree. The Greeks in the height of their glory could not find the cardinal points astronomically within eight degrees. But the builders of the Great Pyramid, out in the Libyan desert, with no guide or landmark but the naked stars, were able to orient their structure so exactly that the science of the wisest Athenian sages, eighteen hundred years afterwards, was seventy times, and the observatory of Uranibourg nearly four times, further out of the way than it is. (pp. 79, 31)
Yet confusion swirls around this mystical structure—not least about how the near-miraculous level of engineering precision was achieved. The pharaoh who built it is one of the most enigmatic in Egyptian history. Comparatively little is known about him. That which is written about him is either conflicting or downright odd. The pyramid itself doesn’t clear up much confusion: It is strangely empty of the normally ubiquitous Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions.
And to those interested in the Bible and the world of biblical archaeology, the Great Pyramid presents another question: Why isn’t such an imposing structure, from a nation that is thoroughly mentioned in the biblical text, accounted for? Numerous other, far less impressive structures around the wider Middle East are mentioned. Why not the Great Pyramid?
Or is it? Is it possible that it is described—but in a manner that has been forgotten over time or largely overlooked?
The Great Pyramid of Giza. Unfortunately, for this pyramid, almost all of the original casing stones have been removed throughout antiquity.
Nina
In a May 1964 article in the Plain Truth (the former flagship magazine of our namesake, Herbert W. Armstrong—d. 1986) titled “Who Built the Great Pyramid?”, the late Dr. Herman Hoeh made the case that the Great Pyramid of Giza was built by none other than the biblical figure Job.
A variant theory relating primarily to the biblical patriarch Joseph made headlines in 2017, thanks to comments made by President Trump’s Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Ben Carson (a deeply religious individual). Naturally, it elicited media ridicule—it was described as belonging to a world of “unicorns” and “aliens” (The Daily Beast); the theory was derided as “flawed and easily debunked,” and based on a “racist” ideology and “underlying assumption … that it couldn’t have been accomplished by the (usually brown) people who claim to have done it” (courtesy Religion Dispatches; ironic rebuke, considering the theory’s featured proponent, Dr. Carson, is a black individual). One Huffington Post reporter claimed the theory is “repudiated by all Egyptologists.” Both the Huffington Post and Religion Dispatches brought up Dr. Hoeh’s article as another angle in their critiques.
But despite the hot-blooded response by various journalists, what was not highlighted was the overall confusion and unknowns among Egyptologists surrounding the construction of the Great Pyramid and the leader who oversaw its construction. And as for the claim of “racism” against Egyptians: Did you know that the notion of the Great Pyramid being the brainchild of a “different race” comes from an Egyptian source?
Circa 1275 C.E. mosaic in Venice’s St. Mark’s Basilica, depicting Joseph storing grain in the pyramids
Public Domain
There certainly is no end to the different theories surrounding the Great Pyramid—each with their own various “solutions,” difficulties and problems (including Dr. Carson’s and Dr. Hoeh’s). Even the great inventor Nikola Tesla was obsessed with the pyramids, believing them to have been some sort of transmitting device—and incorporating their shape and even longitudinal placement into his electromagnetic tower designs. From the biblical angle, Dr. Carson’s own belief in the pyramid’s connection with Joseph and his granaries has been around for well over 1,000 years. (For example, as the ninth-century c.e. Dionysius i Telmaharoyo, Patriarch of Antioch, wrote: “We saw in Egypt the pyramids …. They are not the granaries of Joseph, as certain folk have thought.”)
But the association with the enigmatic biblical figure of Job is fascinating, for a multitude of reasons. Are you familiar with the theory? Here’s a journey through the lines of evidence.
Subscribe to receive updates and articles from the aiba.
E-mail Address
Subscribe
A World of Unknowns
Statuette of Khufu/Cheops (Cairo Museum)
Olaf Tausch
For such a domineering edifice as the Great Pyramid, next to nothing is known about the individual who had it made. No statues of this pharaoh have been discovered (or rather, of this king—“pharaoh” was a term primarily used during later Egyptian periods). Only a tiny, palm-sized statuette depicting this ruler has been uncovered—ironically, the smallest royal Egyptian sculpture ever discovered.
Knowledge about this individual and the pyramid built for him primarily comes to us from the classical historians—notably the Greek Herodotus (fifth century b.c.e.), the Egyptian Manetho (third century b.c.e.), and the Sicilian Diodorus (first century b.c.e.). Thanks to the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphs in the 19th century, a little more has been gleaned from ancient Egyptian sources, such as the Westcar Papyrus (a later, courtly literary tale that features the king as a main character), as well as certain inscriptions at Giza. Still, relatively little.
And from the accounts available to us, particularly those of the classical historians, we get more questions than answers. Herodotus called this king “Cheops.” Manetho called him “Suphis,” but included a note about Herodotus’s assertion that it was built by a “Cheops”—apparently inferring that Herodotus attributed the structure to an entirely different individual. Diodorus, for his part, called him “Harmais”—although he noted that the Egyptians of his day didn’t seem to know who built it. Various other records called him Chnoubos and Sofe.
Marble head of an Egyptian-Ptolemaic era priest (as Manetho may have looked)
Anagoria
Ancient Egyptian texts ascribe the pyramid to a certain “Khufu.” The Turin King List says that he reigned 23 years. Herodotus gave the pyramid king 50 years of rule. Manetho, 63 years. Yet the highest regnal year thus far discovered on an inscription relating to him attests only up to the 17th year of his reign. With numbers all over the place for this ruler, modern historians variously give him a regnal length of 26 to 46 years.
The first-century c.e. Roman philosopher Pliny the Elder aptly summed it up, writing that the pyramids of Giza “are described by the following writers: Herodotus, Euhemerus, Duris of Samos, Aristagoras, Dionysius, Artemidorus, Alexander Polyhistor, Butoridas, Antisthenes, Demetrius, Demoteles, and Apion. These authors, however, are disagreed as to the persons by whom they were constructed” (Natural History, 36.17).
Another chief issue is the dating of the construction of the Great Pyramid itself (and thus, the reign of the king associated with it). The typical modern conclusion is that it dates to sometime between 2600 and 2500 b.c.e., during Egypt’s Fourth Dynasty. Yet, over less than two centuries of scholarship, this date has varied by thousands of years.
Second-century C.E. Roman bust of Herodotus
Public Domain
Herodotus and Diodorus both put Cheops/Khufu and his pyramid just following the Ramesside period, sometime just prior to 1000 b.c.e. (Still, Diodorus noted that even during his day, there were claims that the pyramid dated up to some 2,500 years prior to this.) Following their interpretation, 17th-century scholar John Greaves dated the Great Pyramid to 1266 b.c.e. And as late as the 19th century, antiquarian and geologist George Henry Wathen dated it to around 950 b.c.e., mocking claims that it could have been built even 1,000 years prior (as recorded in his 1843 publication, Arts, Antiquities, and Chronology of Ancient Egypt).
But around the same time, in 1835, influenced by Manetho’s chronology, Sir John Gardner Wilkinson did just that, dating the construction to over 1,000 years earlier—2123 b.c.e. Just 15 years later, Egyptologist Karl Richard Lepsius dated it another 1,000 years earlier, to 3124 b.c.e. Barely 18 years after that, Egyptologist Auguste Mariette dated it more than 1,000 years earlier again, to 4235 b.c.e. The famous 11th edition of Encyclopedia Britannica put the reign of the Great Pyramid’s builder another 500 years earlier again, circa 4700 b.c.e. And even these could be considered the more “conservative” dates: Various pseudoscientific theories by scholars outside the mainstream have since placed the construction of the pyramids up to as early as 13,000 years ago (with one extreme variation placing the construction three times earlier again, in 36,400 b.c.e.)! But from the later decades of the 20th century to today, mainstream dating seems to have more or less settled down to around the mid-2000s b.c.e.
Yet even radiocarbon dating hasn’t been much help on this question (and is a more dubious method than is commonly realized, especially for earlier periods—you can read our article on this subject here). Various samples of wood from the Great Pyramid have been dated: One wood item gave a date up to as early as 3341 b.c.e.; another was dated up to as late as 2484 b.c.e.
Then there is the debate about how the pyramid was built (see one good theory in the video above). Various classical historians asserted that it must have been on the backs of slaves. Yet based on the overall perfection, integrity and quality of the structure itself, early Egyptian texts, and archaeological remains showing the workers were well-fed and housed, that theory of slave-labor has now largely been debunked.
The peculiarly plain, unadorned “burial” chamber in the heart of the pyramid
Jon Bodsworth
Yet besides the general mystery of how is the mystery of why. Why was the Great Pyramid constructed (or the Egyptian pyramids at all, for that matter)? Pyramids are not at all ubiquitous structures throughout Egypt’s history. The most famous pyramids—the Step Pyramid, the Red Pyramid, the Bent Pyramid, the Great Pyramid of Khufu, the Pyramid of Khafre (Khufu’s son), the Pyramid of Menkaure (Khafre’s son), and their smaller satellites—were all built over roughly a single-century window of time, deep in Egypt’s past. What, exactly, was their overall purpose? Why the design? Was the Great Pyramid simply a tomb? There is a key theory that Khufu was never even buried in the pyramid (as attested, for example, by Herodotus) and that the “tomb” chamber was never properly completed as such. Indeed, no remains or grave goods have been found in what is believed to be the burial crypt. Was this the result of tomb robbery? Or was the king never really buried there?
Also, thanks to new technology (in the form of muon scanning, completed in 2017), we now know that there are more chambers buried within the Great Pyramid that have yet to be explored: two in particular, one of them an exceptionally large void within the upper part of the structure, estimated to be 30 meters long and 6 meters high. What does it contain? Is there a way to access it?
Schematic section of the Great Pyramid. (Note that these are the known voids and chambers—more have since been identified by muon scanning, the nature of which is unknown.) 1. Original entrance. 2. New entrance (“tourist” entrance, a forced tunnel by the ninth-century Caliph Al-Ma’mun). 3. Descending corridor. 4. Descending tunnel. 5. Lower chamber. 6. Ascending corridor. 7. Intermediate chamber (or “of the Queen”) and relative ventilation ducts. 8. Horizontal corridor. 9. Great Gallery. 10. Upper chamber (or “of the King”) and relative ventilation ducts. 11. Vertical tunnel.
Flanker/Wikipedia
And here’s something to really make you question everything you know: Did you know that the Great Pyramid does not have four sides? Technically, it is eight-sided; each of the four main faces are actually made up of two angles, joined down the center (largely invisible from the ground, but viewable from the air). Again, why?
Screengrab
The plot thickens.
No Ordinary Egyptian King
Manetho asserted that the kings of the Fourth Dynasty (of whom there were six, Khufu being second and most significant among them) were people dwelling in Memphis “of a different race” (as relayed in Wathen’s Arts, Antiquities, and Chronology of Ancient Egypt, pg. 54—he continued to expound on how they were a “hated race” by the Egyptians). This “different race” statement by Manetho introduces his summary of Suphis/Khufu, and it is a unique remark made by him of no other Egyptian dynasty.
Interestingly, the classical historians also noted that this leader stopped the polytheistic worship occurring around Egypt at the time. Herodotus, in his Histories (2.124, 128), noted the following about this individual (again, whom he referred to by the name Cheops):
Cheops became king over them and brought them to every kind of evil: for he shut up all the temples, and … kept them from sacrificing there. Thus, they reckon that for 106 years Egypt was in great misery and the temples so long shut were never opened. The people [Egyptians at the time of Herodotus] hate the memory of these two kings [Cheops/Khufu and his son, Khafre] so much that they do not much wish to name them.
Beyond the shutting of temples, it is also theorized that this ruler may have even banned the making of statues—given the overall lack thereof relating to him (excepting the above small statuette, the dating of which itself is still, like the very pyramid, highly debated—varying up to as much as 2,000 years following the reign of Khufu).
The third-century b.c.e. Manetho (who, as an Egyptian priest-historian, had greater access to Egyptian records than did the traveling Greek historian Herodotus) provided further detail. In describing this king as “belonging to a different royal line,” he wrote the following: “Suphis, the builder of the Great Pyramid, which Herodotus says was built by Cheops. Suphis conceived a contempt for the gods, but repenting of this, he composed the Sacred Book” (Frag. 15). Or, as preserved through early Armenian texts (note that Manetho’s original text has been lost and is only preserved through fragments or secondary accounts): “Suphis behaved arrogantly towards the gods themselves: then, in penitence, he composed the Sacred Book.”
The identity of this “Sacred Book” is a real puzzle. But this statement by Manetho happens to be the entire pretext of the sacred biblical book of Job.
Let the Stones Speak
Get Our Magazine
Request your free subscription
to Let the Stones Speak magazine
Subscribe
Job—the ‘Greatest Man of Antiquity’
Much like Khufu and his pyramid, the book of Job is an enigma. This is chronologically considered to be the earliest book of the Bible. There is no mention of Israel, Moses, an Exodus or even the Israelite patriarchs. It represents an early period in which sacrifices were evidently still permissible from separate locations and by non-Levites (e.g. Job 42:8). Yet there is apparent reference to the Flood (Job 22:15-17). As such, the setting is apparently “post-Flood” but still at a very early period in time, probably the “early patriarchal era,” as noted by Craig Davis in his book Dating the Old Testament. The 17th century theologian and academic Dr. John Owen, in his Theologoumen, assigns Job to the period just prior to Abraham. Joseph Seiss, to the “pre-Abrahamic age of Serug, Reu, and Peleg” (A Miracle in Stone, pg. 84). Whatever the case, the general clues from within the book places it chronologically earlier than the Torah (written by Moses) and the other books of the Hebrew Bible.
Further, the book of Job is believed by many to be a translation into Hebrew from an original text of another language, based on certain peculiarities throughout. Davis, who explains them in his book, summarizes: “Job is distinctively non-Israelite in nature, saying nothing about the land of Israel, the people and history of Israel, or the religious practices in Israel. The names of Job and his friends are not Israelite names. This … hints at a non-Israelite origin for the book. If the book’s origin was not within Israel, the original language would likely not be Hebrew.”
The book of Job introduces the protagonist in no uncertain terms: “[T]his man was the greatest of all the men of the east” (Job 1:3). The word “east” here can mean exactly that—but it is also the same word for “ancient times” or “antiquity.” Thus, it can be just as accurately translated “this man was the greatest of all the men of antiquity.” (And this may well be the better translation, as other words are used in Job to describe “east” directionally.)
Naturally then, this “greatest man of antiquity” is characterized as a powerful leader and a king. “I [Job] … sat as chief, And dwelt as a king …” (Job 29:25). “Unto me men gave ear, and waited, And kept silence for my counsel” (verse 21). “The young men saw me, and hid themselves, And the aged rose up and stood; The princes refrained talking, And laid their hand on their mouth; The voice of the nobles was hushed, And their tongue cleaved to the roof of their mouth” (verses 8-10). Apparently he was also endowed with “flattering titles” (Job 32:21-22). Job 19:9 mentions Job’s “glory” and the “crown” upon his head. God Himself praises the greatness of Job: “Hast thou considered My servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth …?” (Job 1:8, 2:3). Job also mused on his death and entombment in royal terms: “[T]hen [would I have] been at rest—With kings and counsellors of the earth …” (Job 3:13-14).
Job and his companions (Doré, 1891)
Public Domain
The book of Job is the account of a certainly righteous, yet deeply self-righteous, arrogant man who ultimately esteemed himself more righteous and perfect than God. Following a series of disasters that befell him, wiping out his prosperity, killing his children and leaving him diseased (covered in boils—chapters 1-2), Job’s true character was revealed in a series of conversations between himself and his three friends (chapters 3-31). Job described himself as “righteous,” “pure” and irreproachable (Job 29:14; 16:17; 27:6), eventually holding God in contempt as “cruel” and “mine adversary” (Job 30:21; 31:35). “Oh that I knew where I might find him! that I might come even to his seat! I would order my cause before him, and fill my mouth with arguments” (Job 23:3-4). “[L]et me alone, that I may speak, And let come on me what will” (Job 13:13).
Finally, following the damning counsel of Elihu (chapters 32-37) and God himself (chapters 38-41), Job was ultimately humbled, cut down to size, and brought to repentance (chapter 42). Following this, he was blessed with another family and double the vast wealth he started out with (Job 42:10-17).
As one of Job’s friends described him: “[H]e hath stretched out his hand against God, And behaveth himself proudly against the Almighty” (Job 15:25). Yet by the end of the book, Job had repented: “Therefore have I uttered that which I understood not, Things too wonderful for me, which I knew not. … Wherefore I abhor my words, and repent, Seeing I am dust and ashes” (Job 42:3, 6). Job also highlighted his desire that his plight be recorded. “Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book! That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever!” (Job 19:23-24; King James Version).
What was it that Egyptian priest-historian Manetho wrote of the builder of the Great Pyramid? That he behaved arrogantly toward the gods themselves, but repenting of this, composed a Sacred Book.
Coincidence? Perhaps. But there are other remarkable details throughout the book of Job that are easily missed. For example, did you know that an underlying theme in the book of Job is grand construction?
“Job and His Friends” (Ilya Repin, 1869)
Public Domain
A Constructional Comparison—But to What?
Job 38-41 contain God’s personal rebuke of Job, where He asserts His vast superiority. This rebuke includes a continuous theme of grand building and construction—the apparent inference being that Job was highly esteemed in this manner. After all, though his work paled in comparison to God’s, he was still the “greatest of all the men of antiquity.”
“Then the Lord answered Job from the whirlwind: “Who is this that questions my wisdom with such ignorant words? … Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me, if you know so much. Who determined its dimensions, and stretched out the surveying line?” (Job 38:1-2, 4-5; New Living Translation).
“Who kept the sea inside its boundaries …? For I locked it behind barred gates, limiting its shores” (verses 8-10; nlt). “Hast thou surveyed unto the breadths of the earth?” (verse 18). “Hast thou commanded the morning[?]” (verse 12). Job’s companion, Elihu, reprimanded Job in the same vein: “Dost thou know the balancings of the clouds …? Canst thou with him spread out the sky …?” (Job 37:16, 18). “Yea, can any understand the spreadings of the clouds, The crashings of His pavillion?” (Job 36:29).
God continues: “Whereupon were the foundations [of the Earth] thereof fastened? Or who laid the corner-stone thereof, When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:6-7).
Subscribe to receive updates and articles from the aiba.
E-mail Address
Subscribe
Pyramids Aren’t Mentioned in the Bible—Are They?
In his aforementioned article, Dr. Hoeh credited our namesake, Herbert Armstrong, for highlighting this potential link between Job and the construction of the Great Pyramid. Mr. Armstrong (who himself visited the pyramid a number of times) expounded on the above scripture, Job 38:7, in one of his early radio broadcasts on the subject of Job—particularly as it relates to the Great Pyramid’s capstone (or, pyramidion). “One point about [pyramids] that is most interesting, is this: It’s the only type of building, that I know of, the only building that I’ve ever heard of on Earth, where the cornerstone is the top stone, and is laid last.” He continued:
[It] signified the very completion of the building. The cornerstone there is on top. And it is a corner—you know, you have the four corners of the bottom, but you have the corner at the top, too, at the apex, where they all meet. …
“And all the sons of God shouted for joy” as the final corner stone was laid on this Earth. Now that’s all figurative language, of course. There isn’t any actual cornerstone on the Earth. He’s comparing it to a building. It’s being compared to a building on this Earth, where the cornerstone is the final capstone, the completing stone that is laid last. …
And, strangely enough, if there is a symbolism to the Great Pyramid, that top cornerstone seems to be referred to in the Bible as the “stone which the builders rejected, that has become the head of the corner”—in King James Bible language—which means the head cornerstone, the top cornerstone [quoting Psalm 118:22].
The restored pyramidion belonging to the Red Pyramid
Ivrienen
These clues further point to a wider possibility: Are pyramid structures, or shapes, mentioned in the Bible? Scriptures such as Psalm 118:22 may indeed reference them.
The “Eye of Providence” capstone, which can be found on the reverse side of the Great Seal of the United States, as depicted here on a dollar bill
Public Domain
Triangles, or pyramids, have long been associated with top-down government structure. To that end, there are biblical hints at future Jerusalem, as capital of the world, being described in such a manner. Various scriptures cite this future city of the World to Come as being like a “mountain” (e.g. Isaiah 2:2). The New Testament goes even further, presenting it as an enormous four-sided city-structure as tall as it is wide. “[N]ew Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven … lieth foursquare, and the length is as large as the breadth: and he measured the city with the reed, twelve thousand furlongs. The length and the breadth and the height of it are equal” (Revelation 21:2, 16). This has sometimes been interpreted as a cube-shaped edifice, yet has also just as often been interpreted as a pyramid, particularly in light of scriptures referring to future Jerusalem as a “mountain” in shape, as well as the fact that such a structure has a parallel layout to top-down, theocratic government.
And what about biblical words that we don’t know for certain—words that may not be properly understood or translated, that could reference such pyramid structures? The book of Job is unique in that it contains the greatest percentage of hapax legomena of all the books in the Hebrew Bible. A hapax legomenon is a word that is only found once in a source—as such, these words can often be difficult to understand or translate, as over time their meaning is easily lost. The book of Job contains nearly 150 of them—and a full 60 are completely without derivation from any known biblical root words. (As a side note, the circa second-century b.c.e. Greek Septuagint translation of the book of Job is some 400 lines shorter than the Hebrew—one theory for this is that the translators became so frustrated with the book’s complex language that they simply gave up!)
Is it possible that more direct reference to the Great Pyramid could be buried in the still somewhat vague, complex language of this peculiar book?
The Great Pyramid = ‘The Rock’?
There are indeed numerous unusual statements throughout the book of Job that various translations make attempts at interpreting. Among them are statements that relate to some kind of worry about removable landmarks, preservation in death and the permanency of “the rock.” What could this be referring to?
Job 5:23-24 contain an assurance from one of Job’s friends that he would be “in league with the stones of the field …. And thou shalt know that thy tabernacle shall be in peace” (kjv). Yet Job 14:18-19 contain Job’s fear that “surely the mountain falling crumbleth away, And the rock is removed out of his place; The waters wear the stones.” Also, “[t]here are [those] that remove the landmarks” (Job 24:2). One of Job’s friends stated: “Thou tearest thyself in thine anger, Shall the earth be forsaken for thee? Or shall the rock be removed out of its place?“ (Job 18:4, kjv). Job replied: “Oh that my words were now written … That with an iron pen and lead they were graven in the rock for ever!” (Job 19:23-24).
Could this “rock” be a veiled reference to the Great Pyramid? Certainly, with the Great Pyramid of Giza, we have one of history’s most enduring, immovable, monumental landmarks—a record in stone, “for ever.”
Job even mused about his death in such terms of enduring preservation: “Then I said, I shall die in my nest, and I shall multiply my days as the sand” (Job 29:18; kjv). The self-pitying Job states further: “I would now be at peace. I would be asleep and at rest. I would rest with the world’s kings and prime ministers, whose great buildings now lie in ruins. I would rest with princes, rich in gold, whose palaces were filled with silver” (Job 3:13-15; nlt).
This is another theme addressed by the book of Job: No matter the grandeur of the individual (or the grandeur of their mortuary complex!—if that is indeed what this is), the rich and poor die the same way.
Job’s Religious Struggles
A key point asserted by Herodotus is that this builder of the Great Pyramid caused a religious earthquake among the polytheistic Egyptians: He “shut up all the [Egyptian] temples.” At face value, of course, this could be seen as reflective of a God-fearing, monotheistic Job. But the book of Job itself describes his fight to uphold proper worship of God, Elohim—even among his own wife and children.
“And it was so, when the days of [his children’s] feasting were gone about, that Job sent and sanctified them, and rose up early in the morning, and offered burnt-offerings according to the number of them all: for Job said, It may be that my sons have sinned, and renounced God [Elohim] in their hearts. Thus did Job continually” (Job 1:5; American Standard Version). Job’s wife notably called out his religious devotion when his trials began: “Then said his wife unto him, Dost thou still hold fast thine integrity? renounce God [Elohim], and die” (Job 2:9; asv).
Job 21 contains the musings of Job on this subject: “[T]he wicked … said unto God [El]: ‘Depart from us; For we desire not the knowledge of Thy ways. What is the Almighty [Shaddai], that we should serve Him? And what profit should we have, if we pray unto Him?’” (verses 7, 14-15). According to Job, the wicked thought, Why should we concern ourselves with Elohim/El/Shaddai? Leave us to our own gods. This statement is similar to that of the later Egyptian pharaoh at the time of Moses. “And Pharaoh said: ‘Who is the Lord, that I should hearken unto His voice …?” (Exodus 5:2).
Another entirely separate biblical passage mentions Job, alongside two other men, as an example of righteousness among Gentile, sinful surroundings. Ezekiel 14 reads: “[T]hough these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in [this certain location], they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord God. … [T]hough Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, as I live, saith the Lord God, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness …” (verses 14, 20). What kind of pagan setting, then, must Job have been in? This isn’t the thrust of the book of Job—but it is interesting, nevertheless, to speculate.
And it is interesting, again, to compare this to the Great Pyramid itself. In the words of Seiss:
And yet, here is the Great Pyramid, the largest, finest, and most wonderful edifice in all Egypt, situated in the midst of an endless round of tombs, temples, and monuments, all uniformly loaded down with these idolatrous emblems and inscriptions, and yet in all its thirteen acres of masonry, in all its long avenues, Grand Gallery, and exquisite chambers, in any department or place whatever, there has never been found one ancient inscription, votive record, or the slightest sign or shred of Egypt’s idolatry! In the centre of the intensest impurity, the Great Pyramid stands without spot, blemish, or remotest taint of the surrounding flood of abominations … (ibid, pg. 81)
Enter ‘the Shepherd’
There is another enigmatic statement made by Herodotus—one that potentially fits with Manetho’s reference to the pyramid builders as being of “a different race,” hinting at a foreign derivation—which provides another possible link to Job.
Herodotus wrote: “The [Egyptian] people hate the memory of these two kings so much that they do not much wish to name them, and call the pyramids after the shepherd Philitis, who then pastured his flocks in this place” (Histories, 2.128). Who was this shepherd? What does this enigmatic assertion by Herodotus even mean? Again, theories abound.
Was this a reference to a region owned and operated by a shepherd at the time of the construction of the pyramids, with whom its construction was, at least in part, affiliated? In A. D. Godley’s translation of Herodotus’s Histories into English, it is speculated in his footnote that this is a reference to the “rule of the ‘shepherds’ (Hyksos) in Lower Egypt, perhaps from 2100 to 1600 b.c.” Josephus, for his part, identified these “Hyksos,” or “shepherd kings,” as none other than the biblical Israelites themselves, who descended into Egypt at this time (Against Apion, Book 1.14). He also credited the Israelites with building pyramids during their stay in Egypt (Antiquities, 2.9.1).
Wathen, in his 1839 publication, likewise addressed this then-common link to Herodotus’s statement about the Hyksos “shepherd race,” the explanation by Josephus about them, and their relation to the building of the pyramids. (For his part, Wathen dismissed this Israelite theory as “arguments utterly insufficient,” based on his belief that the pyramids had to be far younger than this patriarchal/sojourn period!)
This rather entertaining printout has been taped to one of Dr. Eilat Mazar’s office filing cabinets for decades. In a mix of German and transliterated Hebrew, it reads, referring to the Giza complex, “This is Hebrew work”!
AIBA
As this Ancient Architects episode asks, could the name Philitis be a reference to the general region of Palestine/Philistia and the Hebrew shepherds that hailed from there—an area that could conceivably include the southern regions highlighted in the Book of Job, of Edom/Teman? And could it be another link to the “different race” of the pyramid-builder and his dynasty? After all, as the Bible reveals, “every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians” (Genesis 46:34).
In his book Exploring Ancient History, Roy Schultz points out that this same chapter of the Bible also describes a “Job” as one of the early Israelite patriarchs, quoting Genesis 46:8 and 13: “And these are the names of the children of Israel, who came into Egypt, Jacob and his sons … and the sons of Issachar; Tola and Phuvah, and Job, and Shimron” (verses 8, 13). Dr. Hoeh draws attention to the same passage. The name Job here is actually spelled slightly differently in Hebrew to the name in the Book of Job (see also 1 Chronicles 7:1), so it can be argued that it refers to a different individual entirely (but more on this further down).
Job has also been variously posited as the Jobab of Genesis 10:29—a pre-Abrahamic descendant of Shem. The abovementioned Seiss (who in his book A Miracle in Stone likewise identifies the Great Pyramid builder as being Job) notes about this individual Jobab: “The seventy translators from tradition [Septuagint], most of the Hebrew authors, Origen, the Coptic version of Job, the Greek fathers, and various modern writers, represent Job-ab and Job as one and the same. In that case we would here have a Job, a veritable Arabian, a descendant of Eber (through Joktan, as Abraham through Peleg), and hence a true Hebrew in the older and wider sense …” (ibid, pg. 85).
Whatever the case—whether Job is to be identified as the son of Issachar, the patriarch Jobab, or someone else entirely—the Book of Job itself does describe the protagonist as an incredibly wealthy “shepherd.” Job is described as possessing a combined total of 14,000 sheep, 6,000 camels, 2,000 oxen, and 1,000 donkeys at a single point in time (Job 42:12)—not to mention the many additional thousands of livestock he owned throughout his lifetime (note Job 1). Could Herodotus’s mention of the then-Egyptian association of the Great Pyramid with “the shepherd” therefore be another positive identification of the biblical Job and his vast flocks?
Woodcut of shepherding by the biblical patriarchs (engraving by H. Pisan after Gustave Doré)
Public Domain
Additional Details
Let’s take a step back, now, to examine the geographical setting. The primary setting of the book of Job is in the mysterious “Land of Uz.” Clues suggest a primary eastern emphasis and location (perhaps constituting territory in or around Edom or western Arabia), indicating that Job was a man of eastern derivation. (There are also various regional traditions of Job from as far away as Oman in the south to Turkey in the north.)
That being said, as Prof. Choon-Leong Seow notes in his commentary Job 1-21, the author “seems to know something about Egypt, as the reference to swift reed-skiffs (9:25) [Egyptian craft made from papyrus], the mythology of a watery monster associated with darkness, a creature known in Egypt as Apep, and the allusions to Leviathan … all attest.” He continues: “There are also surprisingly frequent mentions of ice (6:16; 37:10; 38:29), snow (24:19; 37:6; 38:22), and frost (38:29) [something that would not generally be expected from an Arabian setting]. … [T]hese allusions … indicate the cosmopolitan background of the book.” Seow notes other Egyptianisms in the text, including loanwords (i.e. the “reeds” and “rushes” of Job 8:11. Naturally, though, if the book represents a largely Hebrew translation from an original language, many such connections will be lost).
As for the emphasis on an Arabian origin, Herodotus also made a connection to the region in his description of the building of the Great Pyramid. He stated that workers “were appointed to draw stones from the stone-quarries in the Arabian mountains to the Nile” (ibid.). Diodorus stated the same—that the blocks were brought from Arabia.
But beyond its more immediate setting, the book of Job does demonstrate an overall wide geographical scope of knowledge. It contains mention, directly or indirectly, of Ethiopia, Sheba, Chaldea (Babylon) and Teman (Edom), among others—as well as mention of the faraway bounds of the Earth. (Job even describes the Earth and atmosphere in circular terms in Job 22:14 and 26:10, arguably reflecting an early knowledge of the spherical nature of the planet!)
Dr. Hoeh noted of the Egypt-Arabian connection, in relation to Khufu/Cheops: “Cheops has another name—Saaru of Shaaru (Petrie’s History of Egypt, vol. i, p. 37). Saaru is another name ‘for the inhabitants of Mt. Seir’ (Rawlinson’s History of Egypt, ch. 22).” Dr. Hoeh explained:
Mt. Seir was famous in history as the “Land of Uz” (Vol. iii of Clarke’s Commentary, preface to Book of Job). Uz was a descendant of Seir the Horite (Gen. 36:28). The Arabs preserve a corrupt record of Cheops of Mt. Seir or of the Land of Uz. They call him the “wizard of Oz.”
Dr. Hoeh, for his part, offered that the very name of Khufu/Cheops can be connected with the name Job (a name pronounced in modern Hebrew as ‘Yeov, and which also can be transliterated as ‘Yeob). The first Hebrew letter of Job’s name is a guttural consonant that apparently would have originally had a more recognizable sound (but that has since become a silent letter in modern Hebrew). By the same token, the names Khufu and Cheops are not pronounced with the hard K sound we associate with them today—rather, the guttural Ḥ: Ḥufu, Ḥeops, or Ḥiobs. Dropping the typical Greek “s” ending, Dr. Hoeh compared this to the common transliteration of the name Job in his native German: Hiob. (Another good example of subtle foreign changes in pronunciation can be seen in the Maori translation of the Bible—Job’s named is rendered Hopa.)
Still, the name Job, as spelled in the Hebrew, means enemy, hated, persecuted, enmity. Thus, it is possible that this was not his original name, but perhaps a slightly different word-play on it, or something else entirely.
Job 42:15 contains an interesting addition about Job’s daughters: “In all the land [of the east] were found no women so beautiful as the daughters of Job” (New King James Version). Notably, the Egyptian name of one of Cheops’s daughters is Nefertiabet—a name meaning “Beautiful One of the East.”
Stele of Princess Nefertiabet (Louvre Museum)
Rama
A ‘Pillar At the Border’
Another biblical passage sometimes identified with the Great Pyramid—for example, highlighted by Joseph Seiss and Herman Hoeh—is found within Isaiah 19. “In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar [variously translated as stone pillar, monument or shrine] at the border thereof to the Lord. And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the Lord of hosts in the land of Egypt …” (verses 19-20).
Of this verse, Dr. Hoeh writes in his above-quoted article: “the Great Pyramid may be the pillar which Isaiah referred to, and it might be again dedicated in the future as a pillar or monument of witness to what the Eternal—the Amen—will do in delivering Egypt.” Seiss writes, equating both these items (the “altar” and “pillar”) as referring to one and the same monument: “Everything in this prophecy seems to look to the Great Pyramid. It refers to some specific and telling monument, and all its terms most fully apply to this marvellous pillar. There is nothing else known to which they do apply in literal accuracy and fulness. …
The location likewise corresponds. The Great Pyramid is the hub or centre of Egypt’s curved shoreline, and so is “in the midst of the land,” as nothing else to be thought of ever was. Yet it is also “at the border thereof.” It stands on the extreme southern limit of Lower Egypt, and on the natural dividing line between the two Egypts. It is thus doubly “in the midst” and doubly “at the border.” (pg. 49)
Indeed, the Hebrew word for Egypt, Mizraim, means “two lands,” referring to the divide between Upper (southern) Egypt, and Lower (northern) Egypt. Further, the position of the Great Pyramid could also effectively be applied to the border of the territory of Goshen (Lower Egypt) that was given to the ancient Israelites (Genesis 47).
Last But Not Least: The Orion Connection
One final item of note, an astronomical angle. A famous existing theory regarding the layout of the Great Pyramid and its two large nearby pyramids (attributed to Khufu’s son Khafre and grandson Menkaure) is that they were built in deliberate replication of the layout of the Orion constellation—namely, the three famous stars of Orion’s belt (see the image overlay below). This is known as the “Orion Correlation Theory.”
The three Giza pyramids superimposed over the three stars of Orion’s Belt
Davkal
The Orion constellation is actually mentioned three times in the Bible—two of those times in the book of Job. Job 9:9 highlights, again, God as the “Maker of … Orion” (New International Version). And in Job 38:31, God specifically discusses with Job His own power over—not just Orion—but “the belt of Orion” (nkjv). Following this mention of Orion’s belt, God then immediately proceeds to ask Job, in relation to the constellation: “Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? Canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?” (verse 33). Can the mighty heavens be replicated in the stones of the Earth?
A key understanding of astronomy also explains how the Great Pyramid was so perfectly, almost inexplicably aligned to True North (not magnetic north, which regularly changes position). The book of Job contains several references to the North, including the following peculiar statement: “Out of the north he comes in golden splendor; God comes in awesome majesty” (Job 37:22; niv). Alternatively, the New Living Translation puts part of the verse this way: “So also, golden splendor comes from the mountain of God.” (On this point, note that the Great Pyramid’s missing pyramidion is often considered to have been made of gold/electrum.)
The book of Job—and equally, the Great Pyramid—contains quite a detailed understanding of astronomy (among other phenomena)—knowledge that scientists have only recently “discovered” in the last few centuries. For more on that topic, read “The Bible Scoops the Scientists.”
Could all of these astronomical and architectural connections help explain what Job meant in Job 16:19 (kjv), when he said, “my witness is in heaven, and my record is on high”?
Let the Stones Speak
Get Our Magazine
Request your free subscription
to Let the Stones Speak magazine
Subscribe
The Great Pyramids of Giza, as captured from space
Sabina Dolenc/Sentinel Hub
The Conclusion of the Matter
When it comes to such an awe-inspiring, yet confounding, monument as the Great Pyramid, theories will naturally abound—they have for thousands of years, and will only continue to do so (unless and until more definitive discoveries can hopefully be made). Among them are several different Bible-related theories for construction—such as a connection with Joseph, Seth, Job and/or Melchizedek.
The theory that Job, the “greatest man of antiquity,” directed the construction of the Great Pyramid is one of the most intriguing and multifaceted. As concluded by Herbert Armstrong: “[T]here are a great many things in the Great Pyramid that are just beyond belief, almost—it was so perfectly designed. And a great many people believe that the Great Pyramid was divinely inspired. At least, you see things in it that certainly make you wonder. And I will say this: I’m not going to discount the possibility at all.”
“It’s an interesting theory,” he said of Job and the Great Pyramid. “At least, it always has been to me, and I hope it will be to a lot of you.”
Armstorng and the Pyramids Video
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Herbert+W.+Armstrong+%22pyramid%22&docid=603527107960374507&mid=B86AF3E734AAAC10C88BB86AF3E734AAAC10C88B&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
Armostrong and Pyramidology
https://herbertwarmstrong.net/pyramid.htm
HERBIE AND THE PYRAMIDS
By Alex
Among all the biblical crap and nutty prophecies that Herbie claimed God ordered him to funnel into our already warped minds, was the preposterous idea that Job built the Pyramids. Unh unh. No way, no how and no wise. Others may believe that, just as they firmly believe that Herbie never, never, never unzipped his pants except to change them or to urinate.
Science has discovered that even the Egyptians lacked the sophisticated equipment and advanced engineering required to accomplish such a feat.
Here are some quotes I discovered on http://www. interalpha.net/customer/ farmer/pyramids.html
"By far and away the most magnificent & mysterious objects are the pyramids themselves. Engineers have suggested that, among other fantastic feats, there is proof of: ultrasonic drilling, electroplating, sonic levitation, and electromagnetic cranes!"
"It has long been suggested that these great structures defy all explanation regarding their construction. There are over 2 million one ton blocks in the Great Pyramid and each is cut with laser precision. They fit so tightly that you could not place a razor blade between ANY of the joints. It is estimated it would have taken 10,000 men 100 years to build a monument of this size. Even with this time scale blocks would still then have to be positioned at the rate of at least one per hour. It is also commonly accepted that it would be near on impossible to repeat this task today and inconceivable that we do it with the tools that were allegedly available to the Egyptians. The angles are too steep to simply lift the enormous blocks and to build a ramp that would enable the workman to pull blocks to the top would have been an even bigger task than building the Pyramids themselves".
And this from Alan Alford's "Gods of the New Millennium" whose book implies the Pyramids are alien-related:
"The internal construction of the Pyramid is believed to consist of a step pyramid structure, superbly engineered to withstand great vertical stress. The stone blocks are precision-cut, and matched so perfectly that the entire Pyramid fits together without the use of mortar. The stones range in weight from 2.0-2.5 tons for the limestone core blocks to 50 70 tons for the huge granite monoliths. These larger granite stones were brought all the way from the quarry at Aswan, six hundred miles to the south. Needless to say, scholars have tried desperately hard to suggest how the ancient Egyptians might have moved and erected stones of this size, but without finding a convincing answer. Modern technology would cope with these weights, but no one is seriously suggesting that the pharaohs could have designed and built such a state-of-the-art machinery. Furthermore, it is difficult to imagine that even twentieth century technology would, in practice, be able to match the Great Pyramid's incredible precision."
Alan Alford's book goes into great detail about all the Pyramids and their purpose and intent. The book is nearly 2 inches thick. His research included field trips to many countries and his explanation of mysterious wonders such as the Sphinx, the Nazca Lines, Easter Island, the Maya and more. This book is a product of over a decade's research.
But if the above was presented to Herbie in a civil and sane manner while he was still alive and perverting, he would turn purple, his jowls would quiver with rage, and he would roar out:
"I SAID JOB BUILT THE PYRAMIDS! DON'T BOTHER ME WITH FACTS!"
Armostrong and British Israelism
https://www.wordofhisgrace.org/wp/usbc/
A Short Critique of Herbert W. Armstrong’s British-Israelism–The United States and Britain in Fantasy
Herbert W. Armstrong (1892-1986), one of the most popular and controversial radio and television evangelists of the twentieth century, was one of the better known proponents of the teaching known as Anglo- or British-Israelism.[1] His most popular book on the subject was The United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy. According to this theory, there is a distinction between Jews and Israelites; the descendants of the Israelites are now the white, English-speaking peoples of Britain, the United States, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, etc., as well as the majority of the people living in northwestern Europe; the above nations are the Israel of Bible prophecy, and the British Royal family is Jewish and descended from King David of Israel.[2]
If any Worldwide Church of God doctrine can be considered Herbert W. Armstrong’s pet teaching more than any other, perhaps this is it. Armstrong was not, however, its originator. According to Ruth Tucker, the idea that British ancestry could be traced to ancient Israel originated in the seventeenth century with a man named John Sadler.[3]
Later, Canadian-born Richard Brothers (1757-1824) claimed a right to the British throne based on his assertion that he was a descendant of King David of Israel. Brothers was committed to an asylum. In 1840, a man named John Wilson published a restatement of Brothers’ ideas in Our Israelitish Origin. This restatement of the probably mentally deranged Brothers’ ideas served to popularize the view. In 1902, J. H. Allen wrote a book called Judah’s Sceptre and Joseph’s Birthright. J. Gordon Melton writes: “Through the efforts of Merritt Dickinson, who had read and accepted the arguments in Allen, Anglo-Israel thought entered the Church of God (Seventh Day) [though it was not accepted as an official teaching of that church].”[4]Armstrong, once associated with the Church of God (Seventh Day), based his book The United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy (later renamed The United States and Britain in Prophecy) largely on Allen’s book.
As founder and “apostle” of the Worldwide Church of God, Armstrong considered British-Israelism to be one of most important doctrines in his church. Writing in the late 1970s of what he considered the treasonous watering down of the church’s teachings behind his back, Armstrong criticized those who tried to minimize this teaching: “Church teachings were being changed. The most resultful booklet of all, The United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy, was attacked, greatly deleted and later put out of circulation.”[5] Armstrong ordered that the full-length version of the book be circulated once again.
As is all Anglo-/British-Israelism, Herbert W. Armstrong’s belief concerning the modern identity of Israel is heavily based on a mix of sloppy scholarship and pure myth. Yet, incredibly, Herbert Armstrong called this fantasy “the vital key necessary to unlock closed doors of biblical prophecy” and “the strongest proof of the inspiration and authority of the Holy Bible!” Armstrong even went so far as to claim, “It is, at the same time, the strongest proof of the very active existence of the living God!”[6]
The United States and Britain in Prophecy was one of Armstrong’s larger works and to refute it point-by-point would take a good-sized volume. Fortunately, it is not necessary for our purpose to go into every particular to prove Armstrong’s claims false. Picking out only a few points will suffice.
First, an examination of some of the myths that Armstrong preached will help convey the flavor of this wild hypothesis. One was that the tribe of Irish mythology that Armstrong continually misspelled as the “Tuathe De Danaan” or “Tuatha De Danaan” was Israel’s tribe of Dan having migrated to Ireland. Armstrong claims, “Tuatha De means the ’people of God.’ The name Dunn in the Irish language, for example, means the same as Dan in the Hebrew: judge.”[7] The implication is that the name of this Irish tribe identifies it as the biblical tribe of Dan.
In reality, Tuatha Dé Danann (correct spelling) means “people of the goddess Danu.” In Irish legend, the Tuatha Dé Danann were the fourth race to invade Ireland. According to Françoise Le Roux and Christian-J. Guyonvarc’h writing in The Encyclopedia of Religion, “They came from the north, according to a very old Hyperborean tradition.”[8] Israel is, of course, not to the north of Ireland.
The accounts of the Tuatha Dé Danann sound like they are straight out of “sword and sorcery” fiction. Apparently so as not to ruin his credibility, Armstrong never related the entire legend. Notice these far-fetched highlights from the Encyclopedia of Religion: The Tuatha Dé Danann invade Ireland, take it from the Fir Bholg, and “defend it against the demonic Fomhoire.” They divide the land with the Goidels, “the Goidels on the surface of the earth and the Tuatha Dé Danann within the hills and beneath the lakes…symbolic and concrete representations of the otherworld.” When Lugh (the shining one) enters Tara, the Tuatha Dé Danann’s royal court, “he enumerates all his abilities to the doorkeeper druid and is allowed to enter precisely because he possesses together all the capabilities of the other gods.”[9]
We have gone this far with the description only to impress the complete fantasy with which we are dealing. Yet this is one part of a doctrine that Armstrong says proves the existence of God!
After saying the tribe of Dan went to Ireland, Armstrong says that the prophet Jeremiah later joined them. According to this story, Jeremiah brought with him a stone that is supposedly the stone beneath the coronation chair in Westminster Abbey in London. British monarchs spend part of the coronation ceremony sitting on this chair with the stone beneath them. According to legend, this stone is “Jacob’s pillar stone,” the stone upon which Jacob had his dream of a stairway to heaven on which angels were ascending and descending (Genesis 28:10-22).[10] In reality, this stone has been proven to be from Scotland.[11]
Jeremiah also brought to Ireland, according to Armstrong, the daughter of Zedekiah, king of Judah. When this daughter married the son of the king of Ireland, the Jewish royal family descended from King David was successfully transplanted to the British Isles. Eventually this Jewish royal lineage entered the British Royal family. The lineage of Queen Elizabeth II, then, goes back to King David of Israel.[12]
All this is a twisted version of various legends. Yet, by this, Armstrong tries to prove that a descendant of King David is still sitting on a throne over the people of Israel (according to Armstrong, the British). This is based on Armstrong’s understanding of Jeremiah 33:17: “For thus saith the Lord; ’David shall never want [fail to have] a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel.’” After also quoting verses 25-26, Armstrong writes: “Unless you can stop this old earth from turning on its axis—unless you can remove the sun and the moon and stars from heaven, says the Almighty, you cannot prevent Him from keeping His covenant to maintain continuously, through all generations, FOREVER, from the time of David and Solomon, a descendant of David in one continuous dynasty on that throne!”[13]
Notes
1. Some of the adherents of Anglo-Israelism are part of what is called the Identity Movement, which has ties to white supremacy and neo-Nazism. Armstrong was never associated with the Identity Movement, although people in it have sometimes used his writings to promote their cause. Return2. Herbert W. Armstrong, “Seven Proofs of the True Church, [part one],” The Good News, November 20, 1978, pp. 13, 16. This information is also found throughout Herbert W. Armstrong’s The United States and Britain in Prophecy. The edition used for this critique is the ninth edition (Pasadena, CA: Worldwide Church of God, 1986), November 1986 printing. Return
3. Ruth A. Tucker, Another Gospel, Alternative Religions and the New Age Movement (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1989), p. 207. Return
4. J. Gordon Melton, Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America, (New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 1986), p. 53. Return
5. Herbert W. Armstrong, “What Is a Liberal?”, The Worldwide News, February 19, 1979, p. 3. Return
6. Armstrong, The United States and Britain in Prophecy, pp. 2-3. Return
7. Ibid., p. 98. Return
8. Mircea Eliade, ed., The Encyclopedia of Religion, Vol. 15, (New York: MacMillan Publishing Company, 1987), s.v. “Tuatha Dé Danann.” Return
9. Ibid. Return
10. Armstrong, The United States and Britain in Prophecy, pp. 98-102. Return
11. Melton, Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America, p. 59. Return
12. Armstrong, The United States and Britain in Prophecy, pp. 100-102. Return
13. Ibid., pp. 55-57. Return
Copyright © 1993-2009 Peter Ditzel
Armstorng and British Israelism
https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/lost-tribes-of-herbert-w-armstrong-1075
The 'Lost Tribes' of Herbert W. Armstrong
THE "LOST TRIBES" OF HERBERT W. ARMSTRONG
CATHOLIC ANSWERS Magazine
What Lost Tribes?" you might ask. Why, the Lost Tribes of Israel, of course. You remember them: taken away by their Assyrian conquerors, roaming from here to there, finally settling in . . .
Courtesy of CATHOLIC ANSWERS
Well, maybe we shouldn't get ahead of the story. Come to think of it, maybe we have no choice, since the booklet under review, "The United States and Britain in Prophecy," gives away the answer in its title. Yes, according to the author, Herbert W. Armstrong, the Lost Tribes of Israel are none other than the British and Americans of British descent.
Armstrong first published this booklet in 1954. It was reprinted in 1987, a year after Armstrong's death, by the religious organization he founded, the Worldwide Church of God, which is making a comeback from a series of scandals that rocked it in the late seventies and early eighties.
You might recall the excommunication of Armstrong's son and heir apparent, Garner Ted Armstrong, who was given the boot because of his philandering and who promptly went out and started his own church, the Church of God, International.
You might even recall that financial troubles forced the Worldwide Church of God to sell off many of its properties and that 35 dissident ministers broke off to form their own church, alleging financial irregularities by both Armstrongs.
But we're not giving an overview of the Worldwide Church of God in this tract. We're just looking at one of the chief doctrines of this church, what is commonly called British Israelism, the idea that the Lost Tribes of Israel are really the descendants of Anglo-Saxons, which is to say the British and Americans whose ethnic origins are found in Britain.
This beguiling doctrine had been around for decades before Herbert W. Armstrong founded his church in 1933, and it appeals, naturally enough, to those of British heritage. After all, who wouldn't want to be a member of the chosen nation (assuming there is one)? And that, in Armstrongism, is precisely what the Anglo-Saxons are—God's chosen nation, where can be found the direct descendant of David and, even today, David's throne.
The United States and Britain in Prophecy opens with this epigraph: "The prophecies of the Bible have been grievously misunderstood. And no wonder! For the vital key, needed to unlock prophetic doors to understanding, had become lost. That key is a definite knowledge of the true identity of the American and British peoples in biblical prophecy."
Only the first sentence of this epigraph is strictly correct, and a good share of the grievous misunderstanding is by people who swallow the writings of Herbert W. Armstrong.
The Argument Begins
"We know Bible prophecies definitely refer to Russia, Italy, Ethiopia, Libya and Egypt, of today. Could they then ignore modem nations like Britain and America? Is it reasonable?"
This is how the argument begins, and notice what kind of argument it is. If these lesser countries are mentioned in Scripture, would it be fair for God to ignore us, important as we are? (We won't discuss here the premise that these other, modern day countries are, indeed, mentioned in Scripture.) You might call it an argument by pride.
Never fear, says Armstrong. "The fact is, [the British and Americans] are mentioned more often than any other race. Yet their prophetic identity has remained hidden to the many." Why is that? Because the Bible doesn't refer to them by their modem names, but by an ancient name. And what is that name? None other than the name Israel.
"Hold it! " you say. The people who came from Israel are Jews. Britons and Americans, for the most part, aren't Jewish. How can the Worldwide Church of God claim otherwise?
Easily. "The house of Israel is not Jewish! Those who constitute it are not Jews, and never were! That fact we shall now see conclusively, beyond refute."
Then comes a history lesson. Israel, as you will recall, was divided into two nations. The southern kingdom was called Judah, the northern Israel. Until the division all these people, who came from twelve tribes, were known as Israelites.
After the division, the people in the southern kingdom, who carne from two tribes, were known as Jews, the word Jew being derived from the word Judah. The people in the northern kingdom, Israel, came from the other ten tribes.
"Certainly this proves that the Jews are a different nation altogether from the House of Israel," claims Armstrong. "The Jews of today are Judah! They call their nation 'Israel' today because they, too, descend from the patriarch Israel or Jacob. But remember that the 'House of Israel'—the ten tribes that separated from Judah—does not mean Jew ! Whoever the lost ten tribes of Israel are today, they are not Jews!"
"By the year 721 B.C., the House of Israel was conquered and its people were soon driven out of their own land—out of their homes and cities—and carried captives to Assyria, near the southern shores of the Caspian Sea!" So it was in 721 that the Lost Tribes got lost.
The Year Nothing Happened
Had they remained faithful to God, all would have been well. "But, if they refused and rebelled, they were to be punished seven times—a duration of 2,520 years—in slavery, servitude, and want." They did rebel, and their punishment extended from 721 B.C. to A.D. 1800.
And what remarkable thing happened in 1800 (the election of Thomas Jefferson not counting)? Well, nothing in particular, but it is from that date, says Armstrong, that Britain and America became world powers, the first, at that time, politically, the second economically (and later politically).
If you think this is convoluted reasoning—the 2,520 years, for example, are calculated by multiplying the seven years of punishment by 360, the number of days in the ancient year, on the principle that each day of punishment really stood for a whole year of punishment—just wait until you read the remainder of the argument in The United States and Britain in Prophecy. It's enough to note here that Armstrong determines from Scripture that the Lost Tribes ended up on islands in the sea, and these islands are northwest of Palestine.
He points out, for instance, that the forty-ninth chapter of Isaiah begins with, "Listen, O isles, unto me." Do you see how this suggests the British Isles? "Take a map of Europe. Lay a line due northwest of Jerusalem across the continent of Europe, until you come to the sea, and then to the islands in the sea! This line takes you direct to the British Isles!"
(The skeptic might note that the line first comes to the Aegean islands, which are also in the sea—the Mediterranean Sea—but this would mean the Greeks are the Lost Tribes, which, as Churchill would say, is something up with which Armstrong would not put.)
Linguistic Legerdemain
Do you want more proof? Armstrong has it. "The House of Israel is the 'covenant people.' The Hebrew word for 'covenant' is brit. And the word for 'covenant man,' or 'covenant people,' would therefore sound, in English word order, Brit-ish (the word ish means 'man' in Hebrew, and it is also an English suffix on nouns and adjectives). And so, is it mere coincidence that the true covenant people today are called the 'British'? And they reside in the 'British Isles'!"
Good grief! No linguist would take this seriously. Did Armstrong really believe that ish in English is derived from Hebrew? Maybe he did. Obviously his many followers do. But they should be a little less credulous when it comes to coincidences in languages. It's easy to "prove" that two entirely unrelated languages come from the same source or at least one from the other.
Take, for instance, Latin and Japanese. Here 's "proof" that one is derived from the other: In Latin, the word for "go" is ite, as in the dismissal at Mass: Ite, missa est. In Japanese, the word itte means "going," as in the phrase, itte kimasu, "I'm going and returning" (said when leaving the house and the equivalent of our "See you soon"). Notice how similar the words are in sound: ite, itte. And notice the nearly identical meaning. The conclusion: Japanese is derived from Latin, or Latin is derived from Japanese.
What logic! What erudition! What nonsense!
Armstrong couldn't resist this kind of argument. It was bad enough to suggest that the word "British" is Hebrew, but he also made another claim: If you take the name "Isaac," you see it's easy for someone to drop the "I" when speaking quickly and to end up with "Saac" as the name of the patriarch. He had descendants, of course, and these may be called "Saac's sons," from which we get the word "Saxons."
"Is it only coincidence," asks Armstrong, "that 'Saxons' sounds the same as 'Saac's sons'—sons of Isaac?" This doesn't even qualify as a coincidence, since Armstrong had to make up the nickname of "Saac" in order for the "coincidence" to exist.
Another Remarkable Coincidence?
He found other coincidences. When the Lost Tribes were scattered, he says, they "brought with them certain remarkable things, including a harp and a wonderful stone called "lia-fail," or stone of destiny. A peculiar coincidence is that Hebrew reads from right to left, while English reads from left to right. Read this name either way—and it still is "lia-fail." Another strange coincidence—or is it just coincidence?—is that many kings in the history of Ireland, Scotland, and England have been coronated sitting over a remarkable stone—including the present queen. The stone rests today in Westminster Abbey in London, and the coronation chair is built over and around it. A sign once beside it labeled it 'Jacob's pillar-stone.'"
(This line of reasoning may not be one of Armstrong's best. After all, one could note that not only Hebrew and English are read in different directions. Japanese can be read right to left, and Gaelic is read left to right, so maybe this speculation really proves the stone brought by the Lost Tribes is none other than the Blarney Stone.) We'll rush to the end of the booklet, where we find proof that "Almighty God fulfilled his promises to the descendants of Joseph in these latter years since 1800. Take these examples of recent history." The examples given are industrial statistics nearly forty years old.
"Total world petroleum output in 1950 was almost 3,800 million barrels. Of this total the United States alone produced more than one half —nearly 52 percent. Together, the British Commonwealth and the United States produced 60 percent of the crude petroleum."
Similarly, "the British Commonwealth and America produced three-fourths of the world's steel—the United States alone produced almost 60 percent in 1951. The United States produced one and one-third times as much pig iron as all other nations combined."
When "The United States and Britain in Prophecy" was reprinted in 1987, why weren't updated figures used? Because the United States and Britain no longer produce a preponderance of oil, steel, or pig iron.
Most of the world's oil comes out of the Middle East, and steel mills have been closing in America over the last two decades. Most of our steel, and the great majority of the world's, is produced in countries, such as Korea, that weren't major producers forty years ago.
If the Worldwide Church of God had used updated figures, a reader might be inclined to think the Lost Tribes ended up in Saudi Arabia and Korea.
Armstrongism's Appeal
What makes the position this book espouses so attractive? It feeds on nationalism. ("I'm of English descent, and now I see that I'm right in the thick of things, biblically speaking.") It supports ethnic prejudice. ("Thank God I'm not Italian—I never liked Italians anyway, and now I see they aren't descended from the Lost Tribes and so are only secondary players in the divine drama, which is something I always suspected.") It seems to be based on a sophisticated understanding of Scripture. ("Armstrong provides lots of citations, and I can't find fault with his arguments—they're so convoluted they must be right.")
But, still, it's wrong, no matter how satisfying it might seem to some.
Copyright CATHOLIC ANSWERS
Armstorng influenced by Adventists Zionists who called the millenium the Äge-To-Come
The Gathering of Israel: A Historical Study of Early Writings, pp. 74-76
Written by Julia Neuffer
Indeed, the winds of doctrine developed hurricane force in 1850 among the Adventists-especially the majority group-over “the age to come.” This was a new name for the old Literalism that the Millerites had denounced as “Judaism.” The result was the emergence of an unorganized but distinct age-to-come party, comprising those who adopted the Literalist view of the millennium.[50] The leading exponents described it in slightly varying forms, but they all saw it as a period of continuing probation, with mortal Jews in literal Jerusalem. Some adherents of the age-to-come teaching came, eventually, to be organized in denominations bearing the name Church of God: one (observing Sunday) was the Church of God of Abrahamic Faith (Oregon, Ill.), and another group (Sabbatarian)-via two Seventh-day Adventist offshoots-became the Church of God (Denver, Colo.) and other bodies related thereto, including what later became known as the Worldwide Church of God.[51]
[51]. Ibid.; also “Marion Party” in the same volume. For the denominations see also U.S. Bureau of the Census, Religious Bodies, 1936, vol. 2, part 1, pp. 36, 46; Frank S. Mead, Handbook of Denominations (1961), pp. 23, 75; on the Radio Church of God see Herbert W. Armstrong’s autobiographical statements in The Plain Truth, August, 1959, p. 15; December, 1959, p. 7;
Armstrong Anti-Trinitarian
To add evidence to our contention that British
Israel is an anti-Christian force, we quote from an
article distributed by Herbert W. Armstrong of
Pasadena, California, entitled HOW YOU CAN BE
IMBUED WITH THE POWER OF GOD! On page
five we quote, "How plain that God is a Family - a
kingdom, not a limited trinity. The doctrine of the
trinity was foisted upon the world beginning with
the council of Nicaea. It is merely a continuation
of the pagan Babylonish trinity of Nimrod,
Semiramis and Homs - of father, mother and
child - except that in this instance the apostate
churches substituted the Holy Spirit for the
mother (Semiramis) and called it a "person." 1
John 5:7: 'For there are three that bear record in
heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit:
and these three are one' -- this verse is NOT
233
INSPIRED - it was not written by the apostle
John!..."
"This verse is a deliberate hoax, foisted upon a
deceived world by an uninspired writer centuries
after the inspired John wrote the book."
"...Instead of teaching the trinity, Mathew 28:19
teaches that God is a growing Family or kingdom
into which we may enter. God is a Family, a
kingdom, not a trinity." End of quote from Herbert
W. Armstrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment