You won't learn this in public school these days, but it's a simple fact of history that our constitutional republic was established almost entirely by White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs). Their concept of constitutionalism began when the seed of self-rule in the Magna Carta of 1215 was planted in the receptive soil of Great Britain, and it steadily matured there until the era of fully formed theological "liberalism" emerged in the 17th century.
That British "liberalism" was nothing like the malignant Marxist version we suffer today: It was a benign and beneficial "let-the-Bible-speak-for-itself" approach to theology that rejected the man-made dogma of both Roman Catholicism and, to a lesser (but still oppressive) extent, the Church of England (Anglicanism).
British Israelism emerged, which held that the line of Judean kings, seemingly broken by Nebuchadnezzer's slaughter of all the male heirs of Zedekiah at the start of the Babylonian Exile in 586 B.C., had been repaired by the Prophet Jeremiah who took Zedekiah's daughters to Ireland, to marry into the Judean royal line of Perez (brother of Zerah, from whom Jesus' mother Mary descended), which had supposedly migrated there. The line of kings was thus preserved unbroken to the 19th century British monarchy – a belief which was as solid in those days as the "Stone of Scone" (purportedly "Jacob's Pillow") that is literally built into the British throne.
It's a bizarre theory to the modern mind, but held by a sizable number of highly influential Brits from the 17th all the way into the 20th century. It birthed the phenomenon we call Christian Zionism in the early 19th century – which actually pre-dates the official Jewish Zionist political movement by at least 50 years. It also appears, at least in part, to have motivated the British to recapture the Holy Land from the Ottoman Turks in 1917 and issue the famous Balfour Declaration inviting the Jews to repopulate Israel, 18 centuries after their total expulsion by the Romans in consequence of the Simon bar Kokhba rebellion.
I confess, I have studied British Israelism and find some of it's arguments quite plausible. Before anyone jumps down my throat about this, please first read the book that persuaded me: "Judah's Scepter and Joseph's Birthright" (1902) which I will be happy to send in PDF by email request. I fully endorse its summary of the Two House teaching and found much of its evidence for British Israelism compelling. Frankly, it's the most interesting and illuminating book I've every read. But I digress.
Read OUR Articles: