|TG on the Warpath!|
Brit-Am Refutes a Sceptic!
Never a Dull Day!
1 November 2011, 4 Cheshvan 5772
1. TG Versus Yair Davidiy, Alistair
Williams, and Bill Rasmussen.
2. TG Versus Steven Collins.
3. Brit-Am Replies to TG.
1. TG Versus Yair Davidiy, Alistair
Williams and Bill Rasmussen.
Re Brit-Am Now no. 1771.
#1. Alistair Williams: Complexity is not an Iron Rule.
#3. Bill Rasmussen: TG Criticism of Brit-Am Not Justified!
Would I be correct to say that neither Alistair Williams or Bill Rasmussen are
Do they learn from Jewish sources?
Alistair's quip that "At the end of creation [Creation] week, the world was
perfect, Adam walked with G-d." clearly contradicts the pshat [simple-meaning]
of the Torah, and this is more clear when considering many statements by HaZa"L
[the Sages] in the midrashim.
However, I refer to the subject with which you choose to devote your time to,
the history of the "lost tribes", and not to Creation.
If history in general is complex, something accepted by all historians, than how
much more so where it is dealing with societies that have lost knowledge in the
continuity of their identity? The process is therefore not unlike that of the
police finding an individual suffering from amnesia, and trying to identify this
person and his/her circumstances which led to the point of them being found.
Most police forces consider amnesia cases complex, and some remain unsolved for
years even in our information-rich Western society.
As for Bill, thanks for the abuse. It seems to me that the greater absurdity is
one of Bill being able to judge me based on 0 information provided in the brief
Instead of calling me intellectually dishonest, I suppose he could have asked
what I base my assertions on? However, this would require you Yair to publish my
assertion in full, which you refused to do years ago, right?' And why? Because
they challenge your own hypotheses. And, if someone challenges your hypotheses,
they may be proven wrong, and remove you form the position you built for
yourself over the years.
This is because "The contribution of research findings, whether quantitative or
qualitative, to the development of scientific knowledge about the social world
depends on the quality of their interpretation and explanation. Interpretation
and explanation of research findings are, in turn, largely dependent on an
understanding of the philosophical foundations of social research." Long before
the emergence of the scientific method and philosophy Mishnaic rules provided
for challenging statements in the quest for establishing the quality of facts
and their interpretation and explanation, and hence halakha (the way to
Clearly an intellectual himself, Bill then deduces based on the few lines of my
comment that I "act immature and speak to you offensively", and this gives you
"a right to put them in their place." wherever that means. A right according to
which law Bill?
As for contradicting the Sages (not of blessed memory to Bill), Bill thinks that
"this guy is very misguided." not having heard the evidence that guided me to
make the statement in the first place, but advises to "Take no heed to what he
says." How very Christian of you Bill. Shoot the messenger BEFORE he delivers
the message;) God forbid you should hear something that may challenge your
current belief in Yair's hypotheses.
Of course Bill you do "fail to see where TG sees Brit Am research as being
simplistic.", because you have never heard anything I had to say! And, you only
regard Yair's "research ...provided over the years [as] very deep and
challenging intellectually" because no other voices are allowed to be heard by
Yair to challenge the shallowness of his research. This, is why it fails to
attract support from the more recognised authorities in the related disciplines,
or a wider public following.
Here is an introduction to Jewish thinking 101 for you Bill - we don't make
speculative statements unsupported by facts like "Could it be that maybe"
because YOU DON'T KNOW if my own understanding of the Tribes of Israel is
fallacious or not. In the Jewish learning there is no such thing as to attack
the person (as you suggest), but attacking his ideas and evidence is a common
form of challenging them in the search for truth (halakha). So you can reject my
comments, because this will allow Yair and his supporters to keep building a
case for something that doesn't stand up to the slightest whiff of rational
inquiry, which is what the vast majority of people on this planet expect as a
prerequisite for being convinced. If I am "just plain wrong.", why is it that
there are so few supporters of Brit Am, with Yair having to constantly plead for
financial support. Could it be "your work" lacks quality control?
And, of course there is the degree of censorship by Yair in that there is no
open public forum where ideas and information can be freely shared and
scrutinized, because Yair doesn't want to let go the control he thinks he has
over the whole subject. For example I can't contact individuals directly and
discuss concepts and evidence proposed by Yair, because Yair fears that if I
prove him wrong, it may remove their financial support from his 'research'. The
Brit-Am membership is not allowed to interact among themselves in such a public
forum, which to many opens the question of impartiality. It rather resembles a
In fact Bill's comments only strengthen my conviction that Yair's research has
long ago become narcissistic, and those that so unquestioningly support it
exhibit all the characteristics of collective narcissism.
In fact the resistance to change is a common issue in society, in this case it
is the resistance to accepting the challenges to 'research' which affects how it
became received truth. This has led Yair to confirmation bias which is a
tendency for people to favor information that confirms their preconceptions or
hypotheses regardless of whether the information is true. A distinguishing
feature of scientific (i.e. Jewish) thinking is the search for falsifying as
well as confirming evidence. This is missing in Yair's 'work'.
I now challenge you Yair to post this unedited.
TG Versus Steven Collins.
Re Brit-Am Now no. 1771.
#4. Steve Collins: New Article.
Saxon Treasure and the Scythians.
Regarding Steve Collins and his blog article.
I hope Steve has a speedy recovery form his concussion.
In the first place the unearthed items in UK he refers to are called "The
Staffordshire Hoard", to differentiate from other finds in the UK.
I find his statement that "I was instantly struck when reading this article that
the Saxon gold artifacts were strikingly Scythian in nature. Many of the
artifacts exhibited clearly Scythian art themes and patterns. Indeed, some were
so remarkably Scythian in nature that they look like they could have been
unearthed from an Asian Scythian burial site." to be ill considered.
Scythians traded rather widely, and their handicraft has been found equally
widely. Moreover, personal items used to be preserved in possession and
inherited for many generations spanning hundreds of years. This included
reproducing style of workmanship. A Saxon copying the style of his Scythian
slave goldsmith would hand the skills down to his children unchanged, and very
little stylistic change is recorded in all ancient cultures for hundreds of
years. This persisted into the mid-19th century where for example rope making
methods went unchanged since the Roman times until the introduction of
steam-driven machinery that made hand-roping obsolete.
Secondly, his statements that "It is my view that the source of this gold is
hardly a mystery. It was fashioned and used by Saxons, who were the direct
descendants of the Scythians who migrated out of Asia with much gold about three
centuries before this gold hoard was buried in mid-England. The Saxon gold was
almost certainly Scythian/Sacae gold brought out of Asia, especially since the
gold artifacts exhibit clear Scythian/Sacae artwork patterns." is also ill
When the National Geographic article states the source of the Saxons gold hoard
'is a mystery,' and opines it may have been originally Roman gold, it doesn't
refer to the style of the workmanship, but ot the identiy of the gold's mined
source. All ancient gold can be traced to its source through chemical/molecular
analysis to identify specific mines, or in the case where it was an alloy. For
example the Shekel, a coin originally weighing 11.3 grams of gold, become a
standard unit of measure in Israel. It contained a naturally occurring alloy
called electrum by the Greeks which was approximately two-thirds gold and
one-third silver. Other gold currencies over the centuries in other parts of the
World can be traced by identifying the precise electrum 'signature'. So, the
gold may have been from the Roman mines, obtained by Saxons during trade via
other tribes to the south, and made by Britanii slave goldsmiths in England
after being taught by a Saxon goldsmith who received the Scythian goldsmithing
tradition which was centuries old. Pure (24 karat) gold only became available
...apart from the touchstone another way of expressing the purity of gold was
developed, the carat-weight (134). This unit of 200 mgrs has by tradition been
derived from the seeds in the pod of the Ceratonia aliqua L., the carob (Arab,
barrub or burntib).
The word "carat" comes from the Greek ktration, which is both the seed of the
carob, and the equivalent of the Latin siliquay carat. keraiion is in its turn
derived from keras, a horn, from the crescent-shaped pods of the tree, usually
called St. John's Bread. The Assyrian unit of weight kisal (ki-sa-al) is the
seed of the carob-pod. The carat as a standard of purity indicates "a
twenty-fourth part". Studies in Ancient Technology, Volume 3; Volume 1965 by R.
J. Forbes, E.J. Brill, Leiden, 1971, p.176
At present a considerable percentage of the world's gold production is produced
from copper or silver ores as the by-product from lead or
copper mines. This production of gold as a by-product from other ores was
probably started by the Romans who in the first century B.C.
began to work pyrites and other sulphides for gold. Studies in Ancient
Technology, Volume 3; Volume 1965 by R. J. Forbes, E.J. Brill, Leiden, 1971,
For further reading I suggest Elizabeth Coatsworth's "The Art of the Anglo-Saxon
Goldsmith: Fine Metalwork in Anglo-Saxon England", Boydell Press, 2002
Lastly, yet another rash statement is made when Steve says "A tiny portion of
the gold hoard exhibits Christian themes (one has Bible verses) so it is evident
that there were some Christians among the Saxons of the 6th century AD."
However, in fact the hoard includes only one strip of gold which bears a Torah
inscription in Latin. It quotes chapter 10 verse 35 of the Bamidbar [Book of
Whenever the ark set out, Moses would say, Arise, [ALMIGHTY] let your enemies be scattered, and your foes flee before you." [And
whenever it came to rest, he would say, Return, [ALMIGHTY] of the ten thousand
thousands of Israel."]
|Brit-Am Editorial Comment:|
TG for some reason here twice uses the Tetragrattam (four-lettered name of God) -which we have changed to ALMIGHTY. The
Latin original that he should be quoting from uses "DNE" which stands for Domine i.e.
Wikipedia: Staffordshire Hoard.
The Anglo-Saxons here appear, in this case, to have been truer to Jewish practice than
At the beginning of the Parasha [Torah Section] there is an inverted Nun and at
the end of the Parasha there is an inverted [letter] Nun, in order to emphasize
that this parasha is out of context here. Interestingly only the first passuk
[verse] is found on the strip, which no doubt was used as a charm given the rest
of the vast majority of the items were warfare related, including helmets,
swords-hilts, and crests worn on clothing in battle.(from BBC report) Clearly
this is a Jewish reference.
Why would Christians write a charm for barbarians to use in warfare'
Writing only one pasuk removes the reference to Israel of course, but perhaps it
was written by a Jewish goldsmith, or even a rabbi wanting to spare his
community form the Saxons by offering a charm for the Saxon chief in return for
There are also three gold crosses which have been folded, possibly to fit into a
small space prior to burial.This suggests they were more likely captured items
valued for the metal, and not possessions of Christians living among the Saxons
who would value them for their symbolism.
All in all, there seems to be a lack of critical thinking and analysis by Steven
in linking The Staffordshire Hoard to the subject of the lost tribes via the
As for the hypothesis that "After their removal into Asia, the ten tribes
retained the name of Isaac, being called 'Sacae' by the Greeks, 'Saka' by the
Persians, and 'Saxons,' 'Saxa' or 'Saxones' by the Romans. The Greeks also
called them Scythians (a name for them used by Paul in Colossians 3:11)" - this
is part of the larger discussion which was never critically analyzed by Yair in
the first place.
Brit-Am Replies to TG.
Yair Davidiy on Behalf of Brit-Am says:
I once heard Rabbi Meir Kahana of Blessed memory give a talk by the Kotel
(Western Wall) in Jerusalem.
An American Rabbinical Student interrupted his lesson with remarks of his own.
The content of the interjecter was somewhat abstruse, of slight interest, and not really pertinent
When he had finished, Rabbi Meir remarked that in a Yeshiva one finds both those
who learn and those who only talk about learning.
TG plays the Jewish card but is unconvincing about it
due to lack of inner conviction as evidenced by other remarks of his.
After all TG said above, is there anything concrete in the first three-quarters of what he wrote?
When TG first began to grace us with his missives we posted them under the name
he sent them by. TG protested and requested that we replace the name he had
given by TG. This is what we did.
TG did not want his name nor his e-mail to be posted. He evidently did not want
people posting to him off-list. He did not even want his identity to be made
Now he complains about not having access to our mailing list! His effrontery is
laughable to say the least. It is more than that. It is malicious.
In future it will be treated as such!
Our forbearance has its limits.
TG is attempting to take advantage of our gentle nature and refined attitude which he apparently interprets as weakness.
Enough is enough!
TG mentions Brit-Am finances.
Perhaps TG is suffering from financial stringency?
If so, we commiserate.
We ourselves have been through and are still going through yet another of such
TG should look to his own house instead of being jealous of others who have
nothing to do with him.
See how contradictory TG is and all who are like him?
On the one hand they say our financial difficulties are due to lack of credibility.
At the same time they imply that financial motives are what drive us?
First of all, Brit-Am functions and has functioned for a good number of years now. We have acheived a lot. Brit-Am has had a lot of opposition to overcome and many difficulties.
We have survived by miracles. Divine Providence has enabled us to keep going and we hope will continue to do so. This was against all odds but Brit-Am did it!
Rather than our need to "beg" (as TG expressed it) for funding being considered as a point against us it actually shows that despite everything Brit-Am has been enabled to function and send forth its message.
Brit-Am did this with only a relatively small body of supporters who mostly came to us by "chance" after surfing on the net.
All the special interest groups stayed away from us.
No external body backed Brit-Am.
Brit-Am and its followers gave and kept on giving what they could because it was, and is, the right thing to do!
It is what the Bible wants!
Anyone who learns the Bible with an open questing mind should be aware of this!
Brit-Am has a religious Biblical and academic message but Brit-Am is not a religion nor is it a scholarly association though scholars do belong to it.
Brit-Am is neither Jewish nor Gentile but a bit of both and thoroughly Hebraic.
It takes time for others to appreciate the uniqueness and great value of Brit-Am.
Brit-Am is extra denominational and extra-special.
Supporters of Brit-Am believe in the truth for its own sake and realize its importance.
Opponents of Brit-Am are not really interested in the truth.
Normally we would not waste our time on such reprobates.
TG however does have some entertaining illustrative value as to how low the opposition can be!
Brit-Am provides a Biblical, religious, patriotic, educational, informational,
and positive service.
We ask they who appreciate us to help us financially because nobody else will.
We see nothing wrong with this.
If TG does not like it he is welcome to disavail himself of our services!
As for considering contrary opinions, we do this all the time. It helps us
Our beliefs however are not conventional.
We face prejudices, and discrimination when we put our beliefs forward.
So do those who believe as we do.
This negativity needs to be balanced on our part by an assertive attitude.
Brit-Am is not a debating society.
Brit-Am is an organization with Biblical beliefs and a Biblical agenda!
As for the "The Staffordshire Hoard" mentioned by Steven Collins. I do not know
what TG wants. TG claims a Jewish Rabbi taken as a slave by the Anglo-Saxons probably wrote the Gold Plate inscription.
This is a new one. Maybe TG should take up writing fiction or producing movie scripts?
The Biblical inscription was written in Latin. At that time Latin
was used by Churchmen and by those trained by the Church and not by others. Latin had been the national language of Rome. Later, the Roman Catholic Church used Latin in its religious services, writings, teachings, and communication.
Many Rabbis are quite learned but most are not interested in Latin.
The Straffordshire Hoard finds also included three crucifixes. This would suggest Christian
Christians use crucifixes, Rabbis do not.
The early "Barbarians" after becoming
Christian were often strongly attracted by the "Old Testament" message and by
Biblical figures and expressions drawn from it.
A Biblical quotation from a Latin translation of the Hebrew Bible is therefore consistent with Christian influence.
Unlike Steven Collins and TG, up until now, we have not taken much interest in the Straffordshire Hoard,
though perhaps we should have done?
We do however have a related article showing a link between Scythian, British
Celtic, and Anglo-Saxon artistic (especially enamel) work:
#2. Article on Scythian Art
Concerning the name Isaac and the Scythians:
We are against discussions that concentrate on isolated points without considering the whole body of evidence they emerge from.
The Scythians were known to the Assyrians, Babylonians, Iranians, and Indians as Sakai.
They were also known as Iski-Guli [Exiles of Isaac], Zohak, and other names. Amos (7:16) refers to the Northern Ten Tribes as House of Isaac. Amos in the Hebrew Bible even uses a variant form of spelling ("sh" instead of "ts" See Amos 7:16 also found, with the "sh" instead of "ts", in Amos 7:9, Psalm 105:9 Jeremiah 33:26.) for Isaac which is close to the word "Shaka" or "Saka".
Scythian names had a tendency to drop the initial vowel. In the Iranian region
of Afghanistan the name "Sak" is accepted as being a form of "Isaac".
Similar observations pertain to the name "Saxon" amongst the "Anglo-Saxons".
These linguistic possibilities should be consdiered together in the context of other names of similar provenance
and the associated historical background.
We discuss this in our work, "The Tribes", and elsewhere.
See Also (Continuation from the above):
TG Replies and Replies to TG:
Sceptics Who Lack Substance!
For more concerning TG and his peculiarities see:
The Great Tartan Disputation.
Offering to Brit-Am
Correspond with us
Send Comments or Criticisms
You may not always receive an immediate answer
but anything you say will be considered and appreciated
Send us an
Books and Offering Opportunities