"Brit-Am Now"-693
1. John Hulley: New Site of Interest
2. Bible Codes Prove Brit-Am Proofs!
Australia and the Land of Sinim.
3. Betty  Rhodes: New Genealogy Entries

1. John Hulley: New Site of Interest

2. Bible Codes Prove Brit-Am Proofs!
Brit-Am Biblical Codes:
<http://www.britam.org/Tribesman/CodesAustralia.html>Australia and the Land of Sinim.
Brit-Am Vindicated by Bible Codes


Article reveals how the Bible  Codes really do show that  Australia is identical with the Land of Sinim. Isaiah  49:12 says that Lost Israelites will return from this land.  The foundation of Australia involved a place of exile "east of Eden", unjust sentences or crimes that had extenuating circumstances were also an element in transporting convicts to Australia who like Joseph were imprisoned but later found favor and blessing. The Suez Canal and passing through the Red Sea was important for the development and populating of the Australian Continent. In New Zealand the early settlers fed off Kiwis that were similar to the quail that fed the Israelites in the wilderness. Australians were instrumental in liberating Jerusalem from the heathen Turks and their German mentors. All these and more were found to be hinted at in the Bible Codes.

Isaiah 49:12 says that amongst the Lands from which the Israelite Exiles will return is the Land of Sinim. We have identified the Land of Sinim with Australia.
Brit-Am Proofs no.22: Australia
If this is correct it means that a significant proportion of the Israelite Exiles in the End Times will come from Australia. It also means that all they were kinfolk of the Israelites in Australia must also be of Israelite stock. We have independent evidence showing the Israelite Origins of the British and much of the Irish and others who make up the bulk of the Australian population. The two fields of evidence supplement each other, i.e. if the Australians are Israelites so are their kinfolk overseas and if their kinfolk are Israelites so are they.  This seems obvious but it needs to be stated. The inter-connectability of Brit-Am proofs needs to be emphasized.
"Sing, 0 heavens; and be joyful, 0 earth; and break forth into singing, o mountains: for the LORD hath comforted his people, and will have mercy upon his afflicted" (Isaiah 49:13).


3. Betty  Rhodes: New Genealogy Entries
The new surnames that I have added to the list of featured lost tribe names has greatly increased  and coat of arms descriptions and art has been added for the following new surnames [not in any specific order]:
O'Sullivan, O'Brian, Roodman, Kelly, O'Conner, Ryan, O'Neill, O'Reilly, Doyle, McCarthy, O'doherty, Quinn, Gardner, Duncan, Cameron, Cotter, Black, Henrick, Shick, McIntosh, McIntyre, Byrne, Lynch, Wellman, Mackenzie, Macleod, English, Grant, Hess, Gordon, Walsh, Gibson, McClean, McKay, Chapiro, Richmond, Goldberg, Seigal.

See: <http://britam.org/genealogy/surnames-featured.html>http://britam.org/genealogy/surnames-featured.html

for the list of new names, as you will notice some names do not have links as of yet but eventually they all will have links as they are the list of names that I will be working on in the future.
As with all Lost Tribes coat of arms, please remember that the arms descriptions and artwork are to be used mainly for clues regarding historical interest in tribal identification and locales in which our ancestors lived - as explained in the following article, "The Right to Arms.


Firstly, there is no law preventing the use of family Arms in the United States or in Ireland. In Scotland and England to display the 'official' family Arms one must obtain the legal right to do so.

Secondly, the Coat of Arms being offered on the Brit-Am Genealogy section are not intended to be exact replicas of the original holder's Arms or Crest. The person who once was granted the original British Arms was from either noble or upper class citizens, who passed their Arms and Crest down to their sons, who passed them on to sons. These Arms were displayed by the family with great pride, honor, and distinction. The original design of the family Arms and Crest belonged to the bearer and his descendants - and had a type of 'copyright' on the official design.That original design is in no way being infringed upon with Coat of Arms being offered on the Brit-Am website. The representations depicted on our Arms [shield and crest] only reflect symbolically what the original bearer, who had the same surname, won the Arms for at the time - nothing more or less. If we were offering the exact replica of the original Heraldic Arms - that would be like Colorado using the official Crest of Vermont to represent the state of Colorado.

When you look at the Bailey Coat of Arms depicted for that surname you will see that the shield is "blue with nine silver stars - the crest is a black boar's head". This is the description of the original Bailey Arms - what the original design looked like and what symbology was used. The authentic symbols are depicted.

When it comes to the Lost Tribes Coat of Arms it is important for us to learn the symbolic items that were used on the family shield and crest as they may provide clues relating to the Identity of the Lost Tribes of Israel - especially the individual tribes. Colors are important - always have been, always will continue to provide clues. The use of the Lion, Eagle, Unicorn and Star, bear, deer, etc., are all important as well - all have meaning much older than the Arms and Crests themselves.

As we have seen through many Brit-Am lessons there are distined traditions that pass down with the tribes by an unseen [but perhaps not unwritten] law that surface time and time again - all to leave a trail along the way for the tribes to trace back to their origins. For instance, take the surname, Evans; the name is Welsh and the Coat of Arms depicts a blue shield with a gold lion {Judah} rampant [ready to charge], and the Crest is a stag [Naphtali ?]. All these old heraldic symbols should be studied and meanings gone over with great understanding and importance - for possibly they hold clues to the Identity of tribal members.

It can be certain that staunch old families from the Isles, who still bear their family Arms, with great distinction, frown [make that a big frown] on Americans [and others], who want to display a same-surname Coat of Arms - what right have we to the honor? We are seekers, we are searchers, and we will find the evidence we need to bring the Brit-Am message forth to the entire world. So, do we have the right to bear Arms? In the light of research and the need to know - the answer is an absolute - YES !

Betty Matteson Rhodes