I am always confused about he Khazar, are they Israelite or not?

This is a question that is often asked and is of significance considering that the descendants of the Khazars (or Chazars) are said to make up over eighty percent of modern Jewry. However, rather than explaining it myself, let’s look at what The Jewish Encyclopedia, the Encyclopedia Britannica and Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia have to say. Space doesn’t permit their entire explanation but the following should clarify your inquiry.

The Jewish Encyclopedia – CHAZARS: a PEOPLE OF Turkish origin whose life and history are interwoven with the very beginnings of the history of the Jews in Russia. The Kingdom of the Chazars was firmly established in most of South Russia long before the foundation of the Russian monarchy by the Varangians (855)…Among the classical writers of the Middle Ages, they were known as the “Chozars” “Khazirs” “Akatzirs” …..it was probably about that time that the chaghan of the Chazars and his grandees, together with a large number of his heathen people, embraced the Jewish religion…..The Encyclopedia Britannica – KHAZAR: member of a confederation of Turkic-speaking tribes that in the late 6th century AD established a major commercial empire covering the southeastern section of modern European Russia ….. But the most striking characteristic of the Khazars was the apparent adoption of Judaism by the khagan and the greater part of the ruling class in about 740. Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia – KHAZARS or CHAZARS: ….The ethnology of the Khazars was complicated by racial mixture and dispersion; most authorities classify them as a Turkish or, less probably, a Georgian people. In the 7th century their Khakan, or sovereign, embraced Judaism and a large part of the population was converted shortly thereafter….

Alden’s Note: Perhaps this is why the Jewish Almanac of 1980 in its first chapter had this to say, “Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a “Jew” or to call a contemporary Jew an “Israelite” or “Hebrew.”

Brooks, in your first Toronto message, you referred to 1963 as a “highly significant” year on God’s calendar. Can you enlarge upon this in an upcoming article in Thy Kingdom Come?

1963 is a significant year; there is doubt about that. Yet, it cannot be isolated by itself as there is a connection to other years, like 1914, 1918, 1933, 1948 & 2003. Our God is amazing, His plan is so complex, yet, so simply understandable as we view events from a future point in time. Yet, 1963 was considered important by at least one other party beforehand. In a 1963 issue of our predecessor magazine, The Anglo-Saxon World, a reader from Essex, England, Douglas White, had this to say.

“I thought that this might interest you.

(1) 18 centuries plus a further 1952 months from the beginning of the AD era, brings us to August, 1963.

(2) 18 books of the Bible, plus a further 1952 verses brings us to Psalm 118, verse 22, “The Stone which the builders refused is become the head of the corner”

Mr. White offers other interesting numerics and ends with the statement, “It looks very much to me as if 1963 will be a very dramatic year.” It sure was, Mr. White. 1963 was the year Martin Luther King made his “I have a Dream” speech that has impacted our society to such a great extent. It was the year of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty between the USA, UK and the USSR. The British Secretary of State for War resigned after lying over an affair with Christine Keeler, which may have breached government security. And President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was assassinated.

Yet, sadly, it was also a year that spelled the end of the true Israel nations as we know them. The dominion was complete. The death knell had sounded. In America, Camelot was mortally wounded with the death of President Kennedy. His plan to expand the policy of issuing interest free silver certificates was abruptly terminated. Johnson came in and the expansion of debt to finance the Viet Nam war was a huge spike in the six trillion dollar federal debt coffin. In Britain, an internationalist by the name of Harold MacMillan was Prime Minister. He was the first prime minister who had, as his goal, Britain joining Europe and he surrounded himself with internationalist cabinet ministers who felt the same way. He also pushed decolonization, which spelled the end of the British Empire. His “winds of change” speech basically set the stage for a South Africa going it alone and ending up where it is today. MacMillan is thought of today as a grand old statesman, yet, was he?

Canada, in 1963, had a grand old statesman in Prime Minister John Diefenbaker. In that prophetic year, external forces allied with internal forces to topple him, who, whether liked or not, was a strong supporter of the Commonwealth. He was also a Canadian first. The following is part of what he believed and as you read it, ask yourself whether our freedoms have changed. He said, “I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong…” Diefenbaker knew that many of the proposed changes were dangerous. He alluded to this in an Ottawa speech when he said, ““We live in a time of chance. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom said that we live in a time when “the winds of change” are blowing. We hope that new developments will come ushered in by winds of change rather than gales of destruction.”” So what happened? One of the gales brought Lester Bowles Pearson, an internationalist, into the Prime Minister’s office. Very soon Canada was on its way to where it finds itself today. He did away with our flag and adopted the present one. As an aside, the new flag is devoid of the colour blue, which is one of the three traditional colours of Israel. Pearson was also the father of bilingualism and biculturalism, which led to such divisions in Canada.

You know, most Israel scholars suggest that 1914 or 1917 or 1918 was the beginning of the Esau Dominion as prophesied in Genesis 27: 40 and I confess that I once did too. Nevertheless, while the foundation was strengthened for the dominion in each of these years, it is my view that the dominion was actually achieved in 1933. I mention this to show its significance to 1963, which in turn must have a tie in to another year of significance or else there is no point to it. In fact, all God’s mathematics connect some way or another. In fact, to really understand 1963, these relationships must be examined and understood. Let me show you by taking you a rather long way around. Remember, when going from BC to AD, 1 must be added to the calculations for the cross over year that went directly from 1 BC to 1 AD rather than 1BC to 0 and then to 1 AD.