Why are the biblical lists of the 12 tribes of Israel so different from each other?

Why are the biblical lists of the 12 tribes of Israel so different from each other?

Whatever happened to Meroz, Makir & Gilead?

Who can name all 12 tribes of ancient Yisro'el ... and get it right? I admit, I'm stumped.

Here is a section of the Song of Deborah in Judges 5:13ff which only lists 10 tribes...

The remnant of the nobles came down;
yea, the people of YHWH came down to me against the Mighty.
Some came from Ephraim, whose roots were in Amalek;
Benjamin was with the people who followed you.
From Makir captains came down,
from Zebulun those who bear a commander’s staff.
The princes of Issachar were with Deborah;
yes, Issachar was with Barak,
sent under his command into the valley.
In the districts of Reuben
there was much searching of heart...
Gilead stayed beyond the Jordan.
And Dan, why did he linger by the ships?
Asher remained on the coast
and stayed in his coves.
The people of Zebulun risked their very lives;
so did Naphtali on the terraced fields.
Curse Meroz,’ said the angel of YHWH
‘Curse its people bitterly, because they did not come to help YHWH,
to help YHWHagainst the mighty.’

So...here is Deborah's list of only 10 Tribes from the poem above.
Ephraim, Benjamin, Makir, Zebulun, Issachar, Reuben, Gilead, Dan, Naphtali & Meroz

Missing from Deborah's list of 10 are Manasseh, Levi, Simeon and Judah and added to this list are Makir, Gilead and Meroz.

cf: the list in Genesis Genesis 29:32 - 30:24 and Genesis 35:18

Yakkov/Yisro'el had 12 sons arranged according to mothers :

The sons of Leah: Reuben the firstborn
Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun.
The sons of Rachel: Joseph and Benjamin.
The sons of Rachel’s servant Bilhah: Dan and Naphtali.
The sons of Leah’s servant Zilpah: Gad and Asher

The list of names would look like: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benyamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad & Asher
It seems at one point in its history, the tribe of Benjamin provided Israel with its first king, Saul, and was later assimilated into the tribe of Judah

In Numbers chapter 1, Levi & Joseph are both missing but Ephraim and Manasseh appear in their place. But in Revelation 7 Dan is removed and replaced by Manasseh:

Here is the list in Numbers chapter 1 (no Levi and no Joseph)
Reuben, Simeon, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Ephraim, Manasseh, Benyamin, Dan, Asher, Gad and Naphtali,

In Revelation chapter 7 the two tribes of Dan and Ephraim are both completely missing and Manasseh and Levi are added to the list of those that were 'sealed'

Judah, Reuben, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph and Benyamin

What gives?

www.biblefood.com...

a reply to: Sigismundus
To the historically-minded, it's not so difficult to put two and two together.
Firstly, Israel is not the only twelve-member confederacy even within the Old Testament, and the number is deemed important in other parts of the ancient world as well (e.g. the "Twelve Gods of Olympus"). So it's likely that as the confederacy began to come together, there would be a temptation to juggle the distinctions between tribes to make them add up to the "sacred" number 12.

I suggest (and have suggested, in a thread of my own) that the Genesis narrative of the births of the sons of Jacob has as its background an historical development which took place in two stages.
The first stage, the first version of "Israel", brought together the tribes labelled as "sons of Leah", led by the "eldest son" Reuben.
In the second stage, the "house of Joseph" arrived in the area, joined the confederacy, and also took over its leadership, occupying the central highlands.
The collections of comments about the tribes in Genesis ch29 and Deuteronomy ch33 offer clues to all this, with a little reading between the lines.

The later official "list of tribes" (Numbers) varies from the "sons of Jacob" list by distinguishing Ephraim and Manasseh, the two "sons of Joseph", and by detaching Levi, now re-branded as the community of priests.
The magic number "12" is established by counting in various allied tribes, "the sons of the handmaids", by counting in the offshoot tribe Benjamin, and by not dividing the huge sprawling tribe Manasseh.

As for Deborah's list;
Gilead is a region, east of Jordan.
Machir appears in the genealogical lists as son of Manasseh and father of Gilead.
Meroz appears to be a town.
It looks as though the Song of Deborah was composed at a time when the list was not finalised. Which makes sense, if the confederacy could not be fully developed before the victory which the song celebrates.

The sons of Jacob

The list of Revelation ch7 is the Numbers list of tribes with two variations;
The names Dan and Ephraim are both dropped.
They are replaced by the names Levi and Joseph.
I believe this has a symbolic significance.
The two names that are dropped are both associated with infidelity, in that they are associated with the two "calf" images.
Whereas the names Levi and Joseph are both, in different ways, associated with fidelity.
So the symbolism of the change is that the "sealed" community is a faithful community replacing an unfaithful community.

originally posted by: Sigismundus
Why are the biblical lists of the 12 tribes of Israel so different from each other?

Whatever happened to Meroz, Makir & Gilead?

Who can name all 12 tribes of ancient Yisro'el ... and get it right? I admit, I'm stumped.

Here is a section of the Song of Deborah in Judges 5:13ff which only lists 10 tribes...

The remnant of the nobles came down;
yea, the people of YHWH came down to me against the Mighty.
Some came from Ephraim, whose roots were in Amalek;
Benjamin was with the people who followed you.
From Makir captains came down,
from Zebulun those who bear a commander’s staff.
The princes of Issachar were with Deborah;
yes, Issachar was with Barak,
sent under his command into the valley.
In the districts of Reuben
there was much searching of heart...
Gilead stayed beyond the Jordan.
And Dan, why did he linger by the ships?
Asher remained on the coast
and stayed in his coves.
The people of Zebulun risked their very lives;
so did Naphtali on the terraced fields.
Curse Meroz,’ said the angel of YHWH
‘Curse its people bitterly, because they did not come to help YHWH,
to help YHWHagainst the mighty.’

So...here is Deborah's list of only 10 Tribes from the poem above.
Ephraim, Benjamin, Makir, Zebulun, Issachar, Reuben, Gilead, Dan, Naphtali & Meroz

Missing from Deborah's list of 10 are Manasseh, Levi, Simeon and Judah and added to this list are Makir, Gilead and Meroz.

cf: the list in Genesis Genesis 29:32 - 30:24 and Genesis 35:18

Yakkov/Yisro'el had 12 sons arranged according to mothers :

The sons of Leah: Reuben the firstborn
Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar and Zebulun.
The sons of Rachel: Joseph and Benjamin.
The sons of Rachel’s servant Bilhah: Dan and Naphtali.
The sons of Leah’s servant Zilpah: Gad and Asher

The list of names would look like: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, Benyamin, Dan, Naphtali, Gad & Asher
It seems at one point in its history, the tribe of Benjamin provided Israel with its first king, Saul, and was later assimilated into the tribe of Judah

In Numbers chapter 1, Levi & Joseph are both missing but Ephraim and Manasseh appear in their place. But in Revelation 7 Dan is removed and replaced by Manasseh:

Here is the list in Numbers chapter 1 (no Levi and no Joseph)
Reuben, Simeon, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Ephraim, Manasseh, Benyamin, Dan, Asher, Gad and Naphtali,

In Revelation chapter 7 the two tribes of Dan and Ephraim are both completely missing and Manasseh and Levi are added to the list of those that were 'sealed'

Judah, Reuben, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Manasseh, Simeon, Levi, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph and Benyamin

What gives?

Firstly, I think you are confusing place names with tribes. The confusion arises because the tribes were initially allocated particular lands after the exodus from Egypt. These lands became identified by the name of their associated tribe. Over time, new lands and territories were added (which had different names because they were not within traditional boundaries).

The original 12 tribes included Joseph but not Joseph's children. They were (in order of age): Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Napthali, Joseph and Benjamin.

Later, Joseph was dropped from the list of the tribes and his children, Manasseh and Ephraim, who had been adopted into Joseph's father Jacob's family, and had become direct heirs of Jacob, were added in his place. This actually created 13 tribes granted separate lands.

At various times, particular tribes 'fell from grace' and so were excluded from the lists.

Generally, when the Bible refers to the 12 tribes, it is referring to the direct descendants of Jacob, not the groups allocated land. When listed by name, it reflects those tribes which found favor.

I have all 12 tribes written down where do you see different tribes?

Ephraim and Mannassah are half tribes. 12 is a sacred number like 12 Apostles. That's why Saul the Pharisee is a false prophet. Jesus doesn't recognize him and revelation confirms that there are only 12 Apostles. Saul is one of those who say they are apostles but are not from ephesus that Jesus mentions. Jacobs sons are clearly listed. Who were Ishmaels sons is a better question. He had 12 as well.

Ephraim and Mannassah are half tribes. 12 is a sacred number like 12 Apostles. That's why Saul the Pharisee is a false prophet. Jesus doesn't recognize him and revelation confirms that there are only 12 Apostles. Saul is one of those who say they are apostles but are not from ephesus that Jesus mentions. Jacobs sons are clearly listed. Who were Ishmaels sons is a better question. He had 12 as well.

a reply to: DISRAELI

You wrote QUOTE "It looks as though the Song of Deborah was composed at a time when the list was not finalised. Which makes sense, if the confederacy could not be fully developed before the victory which the song celebrates. The list of Revelation ch7 is the Numbers list of tribes with two variations; The names Dan and Ephraim are both dropped.
They are replaced by the names Levi and Joseph. I believe this has a symbolic significance.
The two names that are dropped are both associated with infidelity, in that they are associated with the two "calf" images. Whereas the names Levi and Joseph are both, in different ways, associated with fidelity.
So the symbolism of the change is that the "sealed" community is a faithful community replacing an unfaithful community..." UNQUOTE

Thanks for your reply.

This idea of removing certain Tribes because of lapses back into idolatry does make a certain amount of sense, except that the tribe of Levi was also associated with idolatry, (the Aaronid Golden Calf episode and the Mu#e Bronze Serpent on a Stick episode) surely ?

Interestingly perhaps Deuteronomy 33 has yet another list placed into the mouth of Mosheh where Simeon seems to be missing - only 11 tribes are mentioned in the poem:

Reuben, Judah, Levi, Benyamin, Joseph, Zebulun, Issachar, Gad, Dan, Naphtali & Asher.

But as you suggested, such an early poem such as the Song of Moses in Deut 33 and the Song of Deborah may reflect a time when the 12 tribes had not yet formed a complete tribal amphictyony - sort of a work in Progress during the time of Moses and later with Deborah...

In the New Testament, coincidentally, we find conflicting lists of 12 disciples in the Gospels, go figure ...

originally posted by: Gnosisisfaith
Ephraim and Mannassah are half tribes. 12 is a sacred number like 12 Apostles. That's why Saul the Pharisee is a false prophet. Jesus doesn't recognize him and revelation confirms that there are only 12 Apostles. Saul is one of those who say they are apostles but are not from ephesus that Jesus mentions. Jacobs sons are clearly listed. Who were Ishmaels sons is a better question. He had 12 as well.

So, why did the frequent 'get-togethers' between Paul, James, John and Peter not result in any of them speaking out about Paul as a false apostle, if he was indeed a pretender?

I mean, Paul was long dead before John died and Paul's teachings were spreading like wildfire throughout the empire. John could hardly have been ignorant of it. Why didn't he say anything?

Why would John's last work describe churches - all started by Paul - as "the seven churches of Asia" and "the seven lamp stands which are the seven churches", if they were false?

Even when Paul openly rebuked Peter, Peter did not denounce Paul (Galatians 2:11-16). Since the other apostles did not denounce Paul/Saul, why should we believe someone who denounces Paul 2000 years after the fact?

:-Oa reply to: chr0naut

It did. As he laments, Saul was rejected in all of Asia. Hetalks mad trash about the real Apostles too. He never even delivered the true message back to the gentiles, lied about what they told him, and states, They added nothing to me. And that they were puffed up (arrogant) from having known Jesus. His jealousy shows. You gotta pay attentiona

a reply to: chr0naut

I don't think the real Apostles took him seriously enough to care what he thinks. They knew Jesus, he didn't. He was nobody, a joke, even Jesus rejected him as one of those who say they are apostles but are not. Not everything is as simple as you would like it to be. Because of Saul the Pharisee

a reply to: chr0naut

You just don't get to appoint yourself apostle, and no real Apostles ever acknowledged him as an Apostle, not once. Luke, his follower, is the only one who calls him that, but Luke wasn't an Apostle and was in error.

a reply to: Gnosisisfaith

You can believe whatever you want, but nothing in the bible shows me Saul was not a deranged lunatic who hated women and states anything showing a man of character. He was the original Joseph Smith.

Thomas Jefferson, though not a Christian, said Jesus was the greatest moral teacher ever. Wise man. He also said that Saul the Pharisee was the first person to corrupt the teachings of Jesus. If you want clarification go to problems with Paul.com and that will clear it up for you. And if you still like the pro-slavery, women hating, jealous maniac Pharisee who said hed die for Jesus and then pleads to Caesar to save his life, commits perjury, maintains hes a Pharisee in open court instead of being a man of his word. Have fun being deceived.

a reply to: chr0naut

There are ONLY 12 Apostles. Saul the Pharisee was not one of them. Either you can count to twelve and understand, or Jesus words don't mean # to you. Jesus had every chance to congratulate his people in Revelation, if he had appeared to Saul, he would've said so then. There is a reason he doesn't, Saul is one of the false prophets warned about in Matthew 24 23.

a reply to: Gnosisisfaith

It seems pretty obvious to me why you hate the Apostle Paul so much...

Paul confronted an early form of Gnosticism and exposed it's leader, Simon Magus for what he really was...

A fraud and a cult leader.

Gnosticism has no more credibility than any other cult does.

This also explains why you and other Gnostics like you never cite any sources.

And about that comparison between Paul and Joseph Smith...

That has got to be one of the most incredibly ironic things I've heard in a long time.

Some say that Gnosticism was considered to be the Scientology of the Second Century, and I completely agree...

Simon Magus from the Bible presented himself as “some great one” or an Archon and was completely possessed by Satan and was able to perform “lying signs and wonders”. Apostle Peter through the Holy Spirit was able to defeat Simon’s sorcery.

Obama’s “Zero To Five” Plan

Satanic practices throughout the world can be traced in an unbroken line directly back to Gnosticism...

Curse of Canaan

The current Illuminati religion is based on Gnosticism...

Simon Magus -- The lluminati's Jesus?

To understand how people are being brainwashed by The Illuminati to hate God and accept the coming Anti-Christ ... You must understand gnosticism! Even the first century church had to deal with these heretics... They claim that the devil is the savior and our God is a devil! They invert the truth!

Illuminati Satanic Gnosticism EXPOSED

The Early Church father, Irenaeus, who wrote a five volume book on the subject called “Against Heresies”, believed that all heresies were rooted in Gnosticism, and thus any heretic was deemed a Gnostic.

unlearnthelies.com...

originally posted by: stupid girl
Most of the Apostlic letters that make up the last half of the New Testament were written with the intent to refute the increasing heresies of Gnosticism. So in essence, Gnostic beliefs are based on the opposite of what Jesus instructed those who follow Him to do. Gnostic beliefs go against the Truths revealed to us by Christ Himself through His Apostles.

The 4th Century Church historian, Eusebius, also wrote of the influence that Simon Magus had in the 1st Century: “Simon was at that time so celebrated, and had acquired, by his jugglery, such influence over those who were deceived by him, that he was thought to be the great power of God. But at this time, being amazed at the wonderful deeds wrought by Philip through the divine power, he pretended faith in Christ, even going so far as to receive baptism. And what is surprising, those who follow his most impure heresy do the same thing even to this day.

For they, after the manner of their forefather, slipping into the Church, like a pestilential and leprous disease greatly afflict those into whom they are able to infuse the deadly and terrible poison concealed in themselves. The most of these have been expelled as soon as they have been caught in their wickedness, as Simon himself, when detected by Peter, received the merited punishment”.

SIMON MAGUS the HERESIARCH [PDF]

a reply to: Murgatroid
Simon Magus was an interesting character, but not why I hate Saul the Pharisee. Accepting Saul is, whether or not you realize it, calling Jesus a liar. For a sacred and specific reason he made the Apostles 12 in number. Accepting Saul is accepting a 13th Apostle, who was a really disturbed man, is equal to ignoring what Jesus said. Saul was rejected in all of Asia and Jesus congratulates them for it. Go with the flow, be like everybody else. Ill honor Jesus, you can have Saul and his false teachings. And if you think you know something about Gnosticism, it's older than christianity, evey religion has Gnostic teachings, and one mans Gnosticism is different than the next. Personally for me, it's a quest to learn every religion, not just the Most popular. I also took Shahada, and was surprised to learn they also reject the Pharisee, and honor Jesus teachings better than your Paulianity that you call cristianity. It's true.

And Iraneus is obviously bias and trying to tarnish the reputation of peaceful Gnostic Christians. Eliminating the competition in the process. He is not reliable at all

And Iraneus is obviously bias and trying to tarnish the reputation of peaceful Gnostic Christians. Eliminating the competition in the process. He is not reliable at all

And Iraneus is obviously bias and trying to tarnish the reputation of peaceful Gnostic Christians. Eliminating the competition in the process. He is not reliable at all