Thread: Some from EVERY tribe, tongue and nation....and extinct tribes

The Americas contained about 170 indian nations at the time of the Louisiana purchase, according to some.

Most of those were going extinct already and very soon after DID go extinct. Most seemed to have had no Gospel witness to them.

Yet, in Rev. 5 we read of some from every tongue, tribe and nation standing before the throne.

In our own day there are smaller tribal groups also dying out and tribal languages are dying.

What does Rev 5 mean?

I've always believed (perhaps I am naive) that God meant what He said. I always assumed some from these tribes did come to the Lord. The Americas were not completely untouched from European influence, and it is possible that the Gospel was carried here long before Columbus and others.

In the past year I have heard with my own ears ( one at a PCA church) two missionaries ( Morocco, Afghanistan) tell about Muslims coming to Christ by dreams and visions. They "see" Jesus and he tells them he is God, or the truth, or the Savior, etc, and to read his book and so forth. They immediately start looking desperately for a bible and for a Christian. They appear to have surrendered already and are regenerated. I realize this isn't ordinary means, more like the Saul on the Damascus road approach, but it happens.


I knew a guy who went to Nam and his buddy in front stepped on a land mine. This guy woke up three months later in the hospital and it took 14 operations to put him back together. Had to build a new eye socket and he has plastic knees. Anyway, he was from a devout Orthodox Jewish family and said that when he woke from the coma, God spoke to him from heaven in an audible voice and told him that Jesus was the Messiah. (He was regenerated on the spot and spent a year in the hospital.)

I heard one other story years ago by a preacher who was approached at an airport by an African. The African told the preacher that for 14 years he had been saying " God, if you are really there, I want to know you". The African said to the preacher that he somehow knew that he should ask him who God is. The guy had never heard one single word abut Jesus and as soon as he heard the gospel he was saved.

Somehow God will fulfill His every promise, and I believe He did, somehow. In the days of King Solomon there was probabaly far more trade with the Americas than we know about, and the truth of God may have penetrated far into the interior. Or God could have spoken out of heaven, or given dreams and visions. You can be sure that He is true to his promises.

I always took it in a sense of there will be people from many different nations, tongues, and tribes and not necessarily people from every single one. This would be similar language to 1 Timothy 2 where "all men" doesn't mean all men without exception. You bring up more modern tribes and nations but what of the tribes that could have gone extinct when God had only revealed Himself to the Jews? Many of them could have gone "extinct" without knowing the truth.

First of all, we don't have God's grasp of the tongues, tribes and nations. What's a tongue? French, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish are developments of Latin. To me, this is the same sort of question as the animals on the ark. Did one of every variety have to preserved - chocolate Labs as well as blonde ones? -- or were two dogs sufficient??? Who knows! Well, God does. The same could be said of tribes and nations. Many believe the American Indians migrated through the Bering Straits. If so, perhaps they aren't, from God's perspective, a different tribe or nation.

What we do know is that the gospel has been proclaimed throughout the world. That is, the program of the book of Acts (1:8), the prediction of Matt. 24:14 has been sufficiently completed/fulfilled: Matt 10:18; Col 1:6, 23.

Also, we have no reason to assume that none of the stillborn and those dying in infancy among these tribes were elect. If the children of believers, dying in infancy, could be saved, so could the children of unbelievers.

Of course, when you take the standard line about those dying in infancy going to heaven, and the certainty that those now extinct cultures had infant mortality... but then again, would people who died in infancy speak the language of their culture in heaven? How would they have learned it?

I don't take the "every" in Rev 5 as an "every" of absoluteness. I think he wrote as we often speak: There was a vast crowd of folks from (his perspective) a countless number of cultural backgrounds.

Okay, let us expand the question then:


What is a tongue and a tribe? How many ethne are the Irish and Scottish, and the picts and the Britons? How many ethne are the Mandan, Shoshone, Cherokee? 1 nation, 2, 3, 4?

In my area there are 6 tribal clans, having 6 different names but sharing a similar and mutually understandable language...are they 6 ethne or 1 tribe?

What are the Biblical markers to designate the way we divide one set of people from another? We had the midianite, amalakites, stalagtites, stalgmites, Philistines, etc all being named as diferent tribes but all were semitic. So is it language, culture, family name that designates how we define these "tongues, tribes, and nations" in Revelation 5...

Or does John use these terms tongues, tribes, and nations, to get across the point that at the end of time there will not be a single barrier where the Gospel has not crossed? Thus, some indian tribes could die without a single believer and God still be true to his Word since this then would be a true reality at the end of time but not necessarily at every point during the fulfillment of history.

midianite, amalakites, stalagtites, stalgmites, Philistines, etc

I think the emphasis is that the gospel has gone from one primary tribal identity (the Jews) to all people groups. You see this promise in covenant language from almost the beginning of time.

But is it rhetorical hyperbole then, or does it really mean all tongues, tribes and nations? That seems pretty all-encompassing for 170 indians nations to die and become extinct without a real Gospel witness (barring extraordinary means).

Originally Posted by Pergamum

Or does John use these terms tongues, tribes, and nations, to get across the point that at the end of time there will not be a single barrier where the Gospel has not crossed?

I think that's a fair assessment. If we try to see John's language as "exhaustive" we would be pressing it too far. Another good example can be found in John 12 where a great number of people go out to meet Jesus, causing the Pharisses to make the following statement:

Joh 12:18 For this cause the people also met him, for that they heard that he had done this miracle.
Joh 12:19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.

Obviously, the word "world" there is not to be taken exhaustively.

Originally Posted by Pergamum

But is it rhetorical hyperbole then, or does it really mean all tongues, tribes and nations? That seems pretty all-encompassing for 170 indians nations to die and become extinct without a real Gospel witness (barring extraordinary means).

If I create a language and speak it only in private so I'm the only one that knows it, am I guaranteed to be saved? The obvious answer to that question should tell you whether it's hyperbole or not.

Originally Posted by Pergamum

We had the midianite, amalakites, stalagtites, stalgmites, Philistines, etc

Don't forget the mosquito-bites and the bud-lites.

But seriously, I'm not sure we can analyze the biblical taxonomy quite as comprehensively as you'd like to. I may be wrong. That's okay. I'm sure I will be wrong about a great many things. But I'm comfortable with your alternative assessment:

Or does John use these terms tongues, tribes, and nations, to get across the point that at the end of time there will not be a single barrier where the Gospel has not crossed?

I don't think that is necessarily the answer. It may be that our distinction in people groups does not equate to God's distinction. But what I hoped to communicate in my earlier post, was that no unreached people-group stands in the way, redemptive-historically speaking, of Christ's return. I know that's not precisely the same as your question from Rev. 5, but I think it is related. And don't take from that theological observation the erroneous notion that I'm opposed to missions. Quite the opposite. But I'm not for missions to hasten the return of Christ. I'm for missions to expand the kingdom, to reach the lost, to glorify God.

Originally Posted by dr_parsley

Originally Posted by Pergamum

But is it rhetorical hyperbole then, or does it really mean all tongues, tribes and nations? That seems pretty all-encompassing for 170 indians nations to die and become extinct without a real Gospel witness (barring extraordinary means).

If I create a language and speak it only in private so I'm the only one that knows it, am I guaranteed to be saved? The obvious answer to that question should tell you whether it's hyperbole or not.

So we know some Klingons and some Elves are going to stand before the throne!

Originally Posted by Pergamum

But is it rhetorical hyperbole then, or does it really mean all tongues, tribes and nations? That seems pretty all-encompassing for 170 indians nations to die and become extinct without a real Gospel witness (barring extraordinary means).

Based on what my native American friends say, a lot of old stories and legends have stories that sound quite a bit like the Gospel. Where did these stories come from? I would like to believe that the Gospel came to those groups in some form.

By the way, I, too, have heard stories, one of them firsthand, of people coming to Christ without reading a Bible or hearing a sermon preached. One of my friends who is now with the Lord, clinically died in the emergency room. Before he we "died" he was not a believer, when he awoke, he was a believer and immediately went out looking for a Bible and a group of believers to fellowship with.

While I'm not sure what it means by tribe and tongue, I do think that there is something all-encompassing about the statement. Perhaps it means people from every part of the world and every language group.