Why are Brit-Am Proofs not Related to by Other Jews?
Contents:
A. Question from Mark Williams.
B. Answer by Yair Davidiy.
1. Jews being Endangered.
2. The Ten Tribes were not Amenable to Receiving such a Message.
3. Psychological Dissonance.
4. Different Methodology of Appreciation.
5. Brit-Am is the Only Answer!
A. From Mark Williams:
re
Yair Davidiy: Brit-Am Hebrews
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBpQ8fvjL0c
https://hebrewnations.com/articles/biblical-proof/list122/speech.html
Shalom Yair.
Just finished watching your latest video and it got me thinking. If the Jews, or at least their learned men, of Medieval Europe knew, or at least suspected, that their Israelite brethren were figuratively a hop, skip and a jump away, was any attempt at bringing them back into the fold ever considered?
B. Brit-Am Reply:
As far as we know the answer is NO.
This is a complicated question.
1. Jews being Endangered. Jews were concerned for their survival. Any attempt at converting Gentiles or even bringing Jews who had become Christians back into the fold involved the danger of severe persecution meaning expulsions, starvation, massacres, and the kidnapping of Jewish women and children. So too, the people concerned were usually pious Christians and would have reacted vigorously to any attempt by Jews to divert them from their path. The situation is not necessarily that different today despite claims to the contrary.
2. The Ten Tribes were not Amenable to Receiving such a Message. We are NOT talking here about Jews but rather about Israelites (from other Tribes apart from Judah, Benjamin, and Levi) and their psychology was already quite different. Judaism had also evolved. The mental disparity would have been difficult to bridge. Perhaps now the gap is much less than it once was?
3. Psychological Dissonance. You are basing your question on the material as we presented it. We used verbatim translations:
https://hebrewnations.com/articles/biblical-proof/list122/speech.html
Rashi:
# "The First Exile of the Children of Israel who were exiled from the Ten Tribes to the land of Canaanites unto Zarephath... The Commentators say that
Tsarephath" means the Kingdom called `France' in everyday speech...#
Ramban (Nachmanides, Rabbi Mosheh ben Nachman, 1194-1270, Spain; from "The Book of Redemption", chapter 1.):
"The vision of Obadiah ...the house of Joseph refers to the Ten Tribes ...who were exiled and still are in their place of exile, the exile of Tsarephath and Canaan which are in the farthest north..."
Don Isaac ben Yehudah Abarbanel, (1437-1508, Spain):
"Zeraphath is France and so too the exile of Sepharad is Spain.. and let you not err just because Zeraphath [i.e. France] is spoken of and Angleterre [i.e. England] is not recalled, for there too did the Exiles go, for lo and behold, that island is considered a part of Zarephath and in the beginning belonged to it and in their ancient books they call it the Isle of Zarephath [i.e. of France] even though it later separated itself from Zarephath [France] and became a kingdom in its own right.
According to the simple straight-forward meaning of these verses it would appear that the Ten Tribes were in Western areas.
I just came across an English-Language commentary "Artscroll Taanach Series, The Twelve Prophets." In the section on the prophecy of Obadiah this work paraphrases (without quoting) the same sources we quoted and interprets them all as referring to Jews!
We believe we can bridge the Psychological Distance of Jews to accepting Brit-Am truth.
One of our projects involves a work in Hebrew with all the relevant Rabbinical Sources in full accompanied by a few words of explanation showing how they all point in the same direction. Eventually an English Translation of this work will (God willing) be made available.
4. Different Methodology of Appreciation.
We approach major Rabbinical Commentators as "Sons of Prophets." They are partially inspired. They often explain the text as they understand it to mean without necessarily internalizing the implications. The prophets too could say things and not fully understand all of it (Daniel 12:8).
We also try and take all the Commentary of Great Rabbis as one whole so that as much as possible it is to be seen as one consistent whole narrative.
Other do not do this.
The Commentary of Rash on Oadiah 1:18 for instance has been explained (in "Kuntres," a French - language magazine on Torah topics) as referring to the Jews of France and Germany, i.e. that Rashi meant the Jews of Western Europe (not the Gentiles) were descended from the Ten Tribes. This type of approach however can be held only if one takes every piece of evidence as separate from, and not related to, the other parts.
The Brit-Am solution is the one most consistent with ALL of the Evidence, taken altogether, as part of one whole body of Proof as given by the Almighty.
5. Brit-Am is the Only Answer!
For some reason or other, for the time being Brit-Am is the only body relating to the Lost Ten Tribes being in the West from a Torah Rabbinical Viewpoint.
Why this is so, we do not know BUT that is the way it is.
Brit-Am needs more support and more involvement.
They who take the matter seriously should help Brit-Am.