While I have a lot of respect for the research and teachings of E. Raymond Capt, here is a topic where he failed to cover the implications completely. I will be quoting from his 4-book series Biblical Antiquities, book 2, chapter 4, pp. 37-48:

“Israel, Judah and Jew.

“Today, there is much teaching on the subject of Bible prophecy by theologians, and it is important that there should be. It is very important for every student of the Bible to understand Biblical prophecies. However, there is one area of prophecy which is vital for us to understand fully, an area which theologians have either overlooked or failed to study adequately. This concerns the prophecies God made with His people Israel, and the distinction the Bible makes between the two houses, Israel and Judah, and their relationship with the Jews. Until this distinction is clearly understood, a great portion of the Biblewill remain a closed book.

“In fact, ignorance of this distinction is responsible for much of today’s infidelity and unbelief. Because the pre-millennial promises God made to the House of Israel have not been fulfilled in the House of Judah, God has been accused of unfaithfulness. Many people today suppose that where Israel is mentioned in the Bible, it means ‘Jews.’ We read articles and hear sermon after sermon in which the writers and speakers refer to Abraham as ‘the Jew,’ and Isaac and Jacob as ‘Jews.’ After a careful study of the Scriptures, often confirmed by archaeology, these teachings are found to be absurd and impossible, all of which I hope to bring to your attention in this study.

“Thousands of Christians use the terms ‘House of Israel’ and ‘House of Judah,’ and ‘Israel’ and ‘Jew,’ employing these and similar words and phrases as if they always refer to the same people. They do not realize that according to Biblical history there were no such people as ‘Jews’ until about fifteen centuries after Abraham was born, and until six hundred years after the death of Moses.

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Already in these opening statements (although Capt is by-and-large correct), he is falling short of disclosing the entire picture. To demonstrate this inefficiency on the part of Capt, I will quote Matt. 23:32-35:

“³² Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. ³³Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? ³⁴ Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: ³⁵ That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.”

These are Christ’s own red-letter words to a genetic group in Judaea, whose origins go all the way back to Cain, who killed Abel. Therefore, we should label them as “Cainite-jews”. Yes, Cain was the first genetic “jew”! Does that surprise you, that the people today calling themselves “jews” are actually descendants of Cain? As time continued on, Cain would absorb several other genetic admixtures to his family tree. One other thing, where Matt. 23:32 states: “Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers ...”, my Bible has a center-reference to Gen. 15:16, where it states in part: “... for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full ...” for which one will have to peruse Gen. 15:19-21 for a list of ten genetic nations with whom Cain mixed his blood. So we have “Kenite-jews”; “Kenizzite-jews”; “Kadmonite-jews”; “Hittite-jews”; “Perrizzite-jews”; “Rephaim-jews”; “Amorite-jews”; “Canaanite-jews”; “Girgashite-jews”; and “Jebusite-jews”.] – back to Capt:

“There are several points which must be emphasized in this study:

“Point 1 – Most Hebrews are not Jews.

“Beginning with Adam, we have the beginning not only of chronology but of the genealogical tables of the Bible. There are ten generations from Adam to Noah, and ten generations from Shem, Noah’s son, to Abraham. Eber, or Heber, was the fourth generation from Shem. All of the descendants from Heber were Hebrews. Abraham lived six generations later; he was therefore a Hebrew. The Hebrews were not Jews because Judah, from whom the Jews descended, was not yet born. When the time came when there were Jews on the earth, they were, of course, Hebrews, that is, a very small portion of them. But the great mass of Hebrews were not Jews and are not today. Let us follow these facts closely. ...

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Here again (while Capt is generally correct), his statement: “The Hebrews were not Jews because Judah, from whom the Jews descended, was not yet born.” It is certainly true that the satanic seedline of Cain had not yet usurped the designation of “jew” before Judah was born, nevertheless they existed well before the birth of Judah. The truth is, no satanic seed-line ever descended from Judah, later called “jews”! This is rather a serious miscue on Capt’s part to imply today’s “jews” descended from genetically pure Judah! Yes, a smattering of pure Judah did mix their blood with Cain, but they would be better designated as “strange-vine-jews”, Jer. 2:21, where it states: “Yet I had planted thee a noble [racially pure] vine, wholly a right seed: how then art thou turned into the degenerate [race-mixed] plant of a strange vine unto me?”] – back to Capt:

“Abraham had eight sons. One son was Ishmael, whose mother was Hagar. Another son was Isaac, whose mother was Sarah. After Sarah’s death, Abraham married Keturah who bore him six sons.

“Since Abraham was a Hebrew, that is, a descendant of Heber, his descendants would of course also be Hebrews, and their descendants would be Hebrews, not Jews. If they were Jews, then Ishmael was a Jew, and as the Arabs are descended from Ishmael, as they will tell you, that would make the Arabs – Jews, which is nonsense. [Good point by Capt, C.A.E.]

“The descendants of Keturah’s six sons became the Brahmans of India. It would be foolish to declare that they are Jews, although, as the descendants of Abraham, they are of the stock of Heber, and therefore Hebrews. The same reasoning applies to Isaac. Isaac was a Hebrew, the son of Abraham. Isaac had two sons, Esau and Jacob. If Isaac were a Jew, then both Esau and Jacob would be Jews. This would make the descendants of Esau also Jews, but the descendants of Esau became the Edomites, later, the Turks. None of these various peoples are Jews.

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Here again, Capt confusedly avers that somehow Esau was an Edomite rather than a “jew”.

The following is from Josephus’ Antiquities 13:9:1:

“... Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would circumcise their genitals, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted to the use of circumcision, and the rest of the Jewish ways of living; at which time therefore this befell them, that they were hereafter no other than Jews.” So we find in fact thatthe Edomites did become proselytes to Judah’s religious tenets, from whence we now call them “Edomite-jews”. This is only a part of the evidence of this fact in Josephus. Evidently, Capt is ignorant of this fact, or he spurned it, as he turned against the Two-Seedline doctrine evident at Genesis 3:15! As for the Brahman connection, that is an old British Israel assertion which cannot necessarily be proven historically.] – back to Capt:

“Point 2 – The namesof descendants do not always apply to their ancestors.

“Jacob, one of the twin brothers, had twelve sons from four different mothers. None of these twelve sons were Jews. One of his twelve sons was named Judah, but in the sense in which we use the word ‘Jew’ today, the term cannot be applied to Judah. For as we have seen, he was not a Jew because of the fact that those who are called Jews today have certain characteristics and are racially a type that came into existence hundreds of years after Israel left Egypt.

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Here again, Capt is confusing the subject by stating: “... Jews today have certain characteristics and are racially a type that came into existence hundreds of years after Israel left Egypt.” As I have explained before, those calling themselves “jews” today have taken on the racial characteristics of several ethnic groups, all the way back to Cain, and that’s long before there ever was an Israelite! While Capt is making many correct assertions, yet he seems to be dancing around one of his play-pretty hypotheses!] – back to Capt:

“This racial type, or remnant, we know as the Jews is only a small portion of the descendants of Judah, who was only one of the twelve sons of Jacob. There are no ‘Jews’ among any of the descendants of Jacob’s other eleven sons.

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Here, Capt seems to be oblivious to the fact that once a pure Adamite mixes his seed with an alien, the offspring is cast out of the family, losing all of his inheritance in the process. The truth is: There are no ‘jews’ among any of the twelve tribes of Israel who have kept their racial purity!] – back to Capt:

“Now Judah had three sons, and the descendants of one, Zarah, peopled the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, leaving Egypt before the Exodus of the children of Israel. Pharez, the twin brother of Zarah, became the progenitor of the tribe of Judah. The tribe of Judah descended from Pharez and was divided by the Lord into two houses: the House of David, and the House of Judah.

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: I would point out that Judah had five sons, not three as Capt states: three by “... the daughter of Shua the Canaanitess ...” (1 Chron. 2:3), Er, Onan and Shelah (all being Canaanite-jews), and two racially pure children by Judah’s daughter-in-law (the “... more righteous than I ...”) Tamar, named Pharez and Zarah. One should take notice that Er, Onan and Shelah are not counted as one, two and three, but are utterly overlooked, while Pharez and Zarah are counted as numbers one and two! It is also untrue that the entire tribe of Judah descended wholly from Pharez only, as Capt implies, for Zarah and his descendants are tribal Judahites as much as Pharez! Also, not all of Zarah departed from Egypt, as many are mentioned in the two places where a census is taken of the Israelites in the Book of Numbers.] – back to Capt:

“Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac was the father of Jacob, who was later re-named ‘Israel.’ Jacob became the father of Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulon, Joseph, and Benjamin. These twelve sons each became the head of a tribe called after his own personal name. From Judah, the fourth son of Jacob, are descended the Jews, if the word ‘Jew’ is considered as being simply an abbreviation of the name, Judah. A glance at the genealogy will show that it is impossible for Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob to have been Jews. Only the descendants of Judah could be called by his name, not his ancestors. No one had ever been named ‘Judah’ until more than 200 years after Abraham.

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Again Capt makes the statement: “... From Judah, the fourth son of Jacob, are descended the Jews ...” The truth of the matter is: The “jews” are not descended from pure Judah, abbreviation or no abbreviation, for kind after kind does not bring forth bastards, whom are always Biblically rejected!] – back to Capt:

“Point 3 – Israel and Judah are separate nations.

“The twelve tribes of Israel became two nations with widely different destinies. The distinction, or separation, between Judah and Israel was foreshadowed at an early date. We read in Psalms, chapter 114, verses 1-2: ‘When Israel went out of Egypt ... Judah was His sanctuary, and Israel His dominion.’ In Samuel’s day, the two houses of Judah and Israel were numbered separately. In I Samuel, chapter 11, verse 8, we read: ‘And when he numbered them in Bezek, the children of Israel were three hundred thousand, and the men of Judah thirty thousand.’

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Surely, when this census at I Sam. 11:8 was taken, many families of Zarah-Judah had already migrated to the Dardanelles, also known as Hellespont., and became the Trojans. Therefore, the “thirty thousand” mentioned here doesn’t represent all of the “men of Judah”, but only the men of Pharaz-Judah, with a remnant of Zarah-Judah! And when it designates “men”, it probably is only counting the “men” ready for war, omitting the women, children, and “men” too old for war. It seems like Capt has an unmerited grudge against the tribe of Judah! Capt should have known better, as he has written extensively about Zarah-Judah!] – back to Capt:

“Notice that even at this early date, Israel numbered ten times more than Judah. The numerical contrast today is very much greater. The Bible tells us that Judah would be ‘few in number,’ but it tells us that Israel would be as the sands of the sea for multitudes, so writes Hosea, chapter 1, verse 10.”

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Had Capt read the next verse at Hosea 1:11, he would have discovered that it states: “Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel.” Question: How does the context change from Israel only at verse 10, and suddenly change to include both Judah and Israel at verse 11?] – back to Capt:

“The Scriptures tell us that David reigned seven years over Judah before he was made king over Israel. If Judah and Israel were the same entity, how could this have been possible? Until the year 975 B.C., the descendants of Jacob formed one nation, but they were spoken of as ‘the two families which the Lord hath chosen’ in Jeremiah, chapter 33, verse 24.

“In the year 975 B.C., at the death of King Solomon, Israel was divided into two nations. In I Samuel, chapter 18, verse 16, the expression ‘all Israel’ is used, when Judah is excluded ....”

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: Here we have a situation where Capt is comparing conditions at the time of 1st Samuel to the conditions at Jeremiah chapter 33, a span of nearly 600 years. Yes, at the time of 1st Samuel the twelve tribes were formed into one nation, but upon Solomon’s death, his son Rehoboam ascended the throne, bringing with him heavy taxation, whereupon the northern ten tribes of Israel rebelled and separated themselves from the southern kingdom of Judah. So, Jeremiah had good reason for stating the verse at Jer. 33:24: “... The two families which Yahweh hath chosen, he hath even cast them off? ...”] – back to Capt:

“... But all Israel and Judah loved David, because he went out and came in before them.’ II Chronicles, chapter 10, verses 12-16, tell us that when Solomon died and his son Rehoboam came to the throne, the ten tribes rebelled, and under Jeroboam formed the Northern Nation, while Judah, along with Benjamin and certain Levites, formed the Southern Kingdom.

“The Northern Nation, which consisted of ten tribes was known under the following national titles: ‘Israel,’ ‘Ephraim,’ ‘Isaac,’ ‘Samaria,’ ‘The House of Israel,’ ‘The House of Joseph,’ and ‘The Ten Tribes.’

“Point 4 – The Division was of God.

“The Southern Nation, which consisted of the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, was known as ‘Judah,’ ‘The House of Judah,’ and later as ‘The Jews.’ The capital of the Southern Nation was Jerusalem.

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: It is an incontestable fact that the word ‘Jew’ did not come into existence until the year 1775. Prior to 1775 the word ‘Jew’ did not exist in any language on earth. The word ‘Jew’ was introduced into the English language for the first time in the 18th century when Sheridan used it in his play The Rivals, ch. 2, p. 1, “She shall have a skin like a mummy, and the beard of a Jew.” The full text of Sheridan’s Rivals can be found on the Internet. The form “J” was unknown in any alphabet until the 1500s A.D. Capt failed to explain how much later the converso-Edomites become known as “jews”] – back to Capt:

“In the third chapter of Jeremiah, Israel is five times called ‘backsliding Israel,’ a term never once applied to Judah, and Judah is four times called ‘treacherous Judah,’ a term not once applied to Israel. Jeremiah, chapter 3, verse 8, reads: ‘And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.’

“Ask those that declare that Israel and Judah are one and the same people to read that passage, analyzing it in the light of their belief. There are many such passages showing the clear distinction between Israel and Judah. There are more than two thousand references to Israel in the Bible that have no reference whatsoever to the Jews. On the other hand, there are more than five hundred references to Judah that have no reference to Israel, and yet there are those who are continually trying to tell us that there is no distinction between ‘Israel’ and ‘Judah.’ They continually refer to Israel as Jews, and even change the name of Judah to Israel. It is as absurd as using the names America and England interchangeably.

“Here is another quotation for these errant people, including pastors, to explain. Jeremiah, chapter 3, verse 11, states: ‘Backsliding Israel hath justified herself more than treacherous Judah.’ Make Israel and Judah one and the same people referred to, and the statement becomes ridiculous. Many today are evidently unacquainted with the fact that, according to Biblical history, there was not a single ‘Jew’ known as such upon the face of the earth earlier than 600 years after the death of Moses, or about 1500 years after Abraham was born. There were, of course, Hebrews and Israelites long before that time ....”

[Critical note by Clifton A. Emahiser: It is becoming quite evident that Capt is determined to throw Judah under the bus, by creating a deep, dark chasm between the houses of Judah and Israel! Capt utterly fails to grasp how closely Judah is genetically related to the house of Israel! Jacob, by his first wife, Leah, fathered Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun, all of whom formed tribes in the house of Israel, with the exception of Judah. That means that Judah and his five brothers all had identical genetic sperm gene-pools (which is the same principle that allows for a Levirate marriage among the twelve tribes). It’s like a family within a family. Not only that, but Leah and Rachel were full sisters with identical oocyte ovarian DNA! Genetically, that would make Judah and Joseph very closely related.

A hypothetical example of a Levirate marriage among Judah and his five brothers might go something like this: Had Jacob’s son Zebulun died in battle leaving a widow, Judah could have had a Levirate marriage with Zebulun’s widow, with possibly a son being born and given the name of “Zebulun”. In such an illustration, the tribe of Zebulun would not have died out, but would have continued to live on as a result of both Zebulun and Judah having identical genetic sperm gene-pools.

While much of Capt’s research is very excellent, he is barking up the wrong tree on this subject. This review will be continued in part #2.]