ain't we all????

[Flavius]

There was once a man who had 2 sons.One of them asked for his inheritance and he recieved it and went away from his father.he mingled with swine{disrespect of Torah} and he became as a dead man and realized he would be better off going back to his father just to be a hired hand.one of the sons stayed home with his father and he inherits everything.I believe this is about Judah who stayed home and Ephraim the prodicle nation who became as a dead man.

If I walk into a government building looking for aid or maybe I wanna apply for disability almost everytime they try and wiggle their way out of helping me but because I know excactly what I'm entitled to,I push the issue and I recieve what was promised.

Alot of you want me to just accept the name of Israel without an inheritance but I am fully aware of the promises made to me and I push the issue because I feel it's my right promised to me by G-d.

 

[Flavius]

Son of man ,take a stick of wood and write on it belonging to Judah and the Israelites associated with him.Take another stick of wood and write on it,Ephraim's stick,belonging to Joseph and all the Israelites associated with him.

It goes on to say that they will live in the land I gave to my servant Jacob,the land where your fathers lived,David my servant will be a prince over all of them.

What you guys would have me believe is that I am not a part of this.

 

[ShirChadash]

Son of man ,take a stick of wood and write on it belonging to Judah and the Israelites associated with him.Take another stick of wood and write on it,Ephraim's stick,belonging to Joseph and all the Israelites associated with him.

Flav, Achi, my friend...

if you can show me where in the TaNaKh that
the gentiles who became G-d fearers/believers before Yeshua came
were ever called Israelites...
then I could more easily believe that the gentiles who become believers now, after Yeshua came,
are Israelites.

 

[Flavius]

Flav, Achi, my friend...

if you can show me where in the TaNaKh that
the gentiles who became G-d fearers/believers before Yeshua came
were ever called Israelites...
then I could more easily believe that the gentiles who become believers now, after Yeshua came,
are Israelites.

Let no foreiner who has bound himself to the lord say,the lord will surely exclude me from his people.

6- and the foreiner who binds himself to the lord to serve him,to love the name of the lord and to worship him,all who keep the sabboth without descicrating it and who hold fast to my covenant ,these will I bring to my holy mountain

Isaiah 44-5. one will say,I belong to the lord,another will call himself by the name of Jacob,still another will write on his hand,I am the lords and will take the name Israel

 

[Henaynei]

Let no foreiner who has bound himself to the lord say,the lord will surely exclude me from his people.

6- and the foreiner who binds himself to the lord to serve him,to love the name of the lord and to worship him,all who keep the sabboth without descicrating it and who hold fast to my covenant ,these will I bring to my holy mountain

Here is the complete quote:

Yeshuayahu 56:6 "Also the sons of the foreigner Who join themselves to the L-rd, to serve Him, And to love the name of the L-rd, to be His servants-- Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, And holds fast My covenant-- 7 Even them I will bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices Will be accepted on My altar; For My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations."
​

This is a promise that gentiles (not Jews) will get a special place and relationship with HaShem. AS gentiles they will be welcomed into the Temple BECAUSE they are Torah observant, yet still genitles. Their sacrifices will acceptable on the altar of HaShem, yet still as gentiles. For in that day "My house shall be called a house of prayer for all goyim." In that day there will be NO OTHER who is worshipped - only HaShem, and all, Jew and Gentile will worship Him, AND those gentiles who keep Torah will be welcomed into the Temple and make sacrifice. BUT you have to be a gentile, not a Jew.

So you see, HaShem DOES have a plan and place for you, Flavius, AS A GENTILE!!

Just as scripture says - IF we bind ourself to the L-rd - which means being Torah observant - all of Torah, all of it - what can be done now w/o the Temple and Priesthood, and what can be done when the Temple is rebuilt. That means a **whole lot** more than most gentiles want to believe. I know of none, including myself, who do it.

Isaiah 44-5. one will say,I belong to the lord,another will call himself by the name of Jacob,still another will write on his hand,I am the lords and will take the name Israel

Here is the context - HaShem is speaking directly to and about the decendents of Yaacov - not to gentiles.
[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]

Yeshayahu 44:1 "Now listen, Ya'akov my servant, Isra'el whom I have chosen: 2 Thus says ADONAI, who made you, formed you in the womb, and will help you: Don't be afraid, Ya'akov my servant, Yeshurun, whom I have chosen. 3 For I will pour water on the thirsty land and streams on the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit on your descendants, my blessing on your offspring. 4 They will spring up among the grass like willows on the riverbanks. 5 One will say, 'I belong to ADONAI.' Another will be called by the name of Ya'akov. Yet another will write that he belongs to ADONAI. and adopt the surname Isra'el."

​

This has already happened and is happening: there is the beginning of a Torah revival in the Jewish community - more and more Jews have been willing to stand up and claim their birthright since Israel has come into existance. Yeshayahu is not about gentiles becoming Jews, sorry.

[/font]

 

[Flavius]

Here is the complete quote:

Yeshuayahu 56:6 "Also the sons of the foreigner Who join themselves to the L-rd, to serve Him, And to love the name of the L-rd, to be His servants-- Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, And holds fast My covenant-- 7 Even them I will bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices Will be accepted on My altar; For My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations."


​

This is a promise that gentiles (not Jews) will get a special place and relationship with HaShem. AS gentiles they will be welcomed into the Temple BECAUSE they are Torah observant, yet still genitles. Their sacrifices will acceptable on the altar of HaShem, yet still as gentiles. For in that day "My house shall be called a house of prayer for all goyim." In that day there will be NO OTHER who is worshipped - only HaShem, and all, Jew and Gentile will worship Him, AND those gentiles who keep Torah will be welcomed into the Temple and make sacrifice. BUT you have to be a gentile, not a Jew.


So you see, HaShem DOES have a plan and place for you, Flavius, AS A GENTILE!!

Just as scripture says - IF we bind ourself to the L-rd - which means being Torah observant - all of Torah, all of it - what can be done now w/o the Temple and Priesthood, and what can be done when the Temple is rebuilt. That means a **whole lot** more than most gentiles want to believe. I know of none, including myself, who do it.
Here is the context - HaShem is speaking directly to and about the decendents of Yaacov - not to gentiles.


[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]

Yeshayahu 44:1 "Now listen, Ya'akov my servant, Isra'el whom I have chosen: 2 Thus says ADONAI, who made you, formed you in the womb, and will help you: Don't be afraid, Ya'akov my servant, Yeshurun, whom I have chosen. 3 For I will pour water on the thirsty land and streams on the dry ground; I will pour my Spirit on your descendants, my blessing on your offspring. 4 They will spring up among the grass like willows on the riverbanks. 5 One will say, 'I belong to ADONAI.' Another will be called by the name of Ya'akov. Yet another will write that he belongs to ADONAI. and adopt the surname Isra'el."



​

This has already happened and is happening: there is the beginning of a Torah revival in the Jewish community - more and more Jews have been willing to stand up and claim their birthright since Israel has come into existance. Yeshayahu is not about gentiles becoming Jews, sorry.


[/font]

Again,I might have said Jew in an earlier post but the land I and the blessing I talked about were Ephraim,I don't want to become a Jew.

Ephraim is catagoricly non Jewish and I believe they have always been considered gentile.just like Joshuah son of non was a gentiles but Caleb became a Jew.

I think the big mystery that Paul speaks about in Ephesions 2 saying his purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the Two{gentile,Jew} and in this one body to reconsile both of them to G-d through the cross.no different than the stick of Ephraim becoming one with the stick of Judah.

 

[elijahlexis]

What is Replacement theology in the eyes of a Jewish Believer? I have posted, in the past, my ideas (and traditional “Jewish Believer’s” take) on various aspects of replacement theology. But now I sit down to actually sum all of it’s teachings up in a nice neat package. (*** How strange it seems to me that Christians were not claiming to be Jews during the Holocaust... Just a thought)





Has G-d forsaken His people? This would be the first logical step in determining if a new people have now replaced Yisra’el. First let us look at Heb. 6:13 & 17.

“6:13 For when Elohim made a promise to Avraham, since he could swear by none greater, he swore by himself . 6:17 Wherein Elohim, being determined to show more abundantly to the heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed with an oath”

Here we can see that His promise was eternal. He could find no greater way to seal His covenant, thus He swore by Himself. To break this….. well, you can imagine the theological magnitude of this….

But what if Yisra’el borke the covenant?

Jeremiah. 46:28 Don't be afraid you, O Ya`akov my servant, says YHWH; for I am with you: for I will make a full end of all the nations where I have driven you; but I will not make a full end of you, but I will correct you in measure, and will in no way leave you unpunished.

G-d will never make an end to Yisra’el. He may punish them, but never fully destroy Yisra’el.

Jeremiah . 31:35 Thus says YHWH, who gives the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, who stirs up the sea, so that the waves of it roar; YHWH of hosts is his name: 31:36 If these ordinances depart from before me, says YHWH, then the seed of Yisra'el also shall cease from being a nation before me forever. 31:37 Thus says YHWH: If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the eretz searched out beneath, then will I also cast off all the seed of Yisra'el for all that they have done, says YHWH.

Here we can see that as long as there is a sun, moon, stars, Earth, and sea there will be a distinct people Yisra’el- no matter what they do.

In ancient days, covenants were made in a special way. Sacrificial animals were cut in two and their severed bodies placed in two lines. Both parties entered into the covenant would then walk between the carcasses. By doing so they were symbolically saying, “If I break this binding agreement, if I fail to uphold my side of the pact, then let me suffer the same fate that these animals have suffered.” But something was different in Genesis 15. Only G-d passed through the pieces! This was a one-way deal.

Gen. 15:17 It came to pass that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold, a smoking furnace, and a flaming torch passed between these pieces. 15:18 In that day YHWH made a covenant with Avram, saying, "To your seed have I given this land, from the river of Mitzrayim to the great river, the river Perat: 15:19 the Kinim, the Kenizzi, the Kadmoni, 15:20 the Hitti, the Perizzi, the Refa'im, 15:21 the Amori, the Kana`anim, the Girgashi, and the Yevusi."

And
Romans . 11:28 As concerning the good message, some are enemies because of you: but as concerning the chosen people, they are beloved for the fathers ' sakes. 11:29 For the gifts and calling of Elohim are irrevocable.

Then some ask, “Why are the Jews living outside the ‘new’ covenant if they are the covenant people?” Shaul had a simple answer to this:

Rom. 9:6-8
“Is it not as though G-d’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Yisra’el are Yisra’el. Nor because hey are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children…. In other words, it is not the natural children who are G-d’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

Natural children refers to Yisra’el as a whole. G-d’s children refers to the believing remnant within natural Yisra’el.

We can see a similar parallel within Christianity. There are those who have been born into the ch-rch, and then there are those who are spiritually the ch-rch. These are those who have faith outside of simply being a part of Christianity only because that is what they were raised in. (this is only an example to show Christians what I mean)

On no definite occasion does the Brit Chadasha ever call the ch-rch Yisra’el. In fact, out of the 77 times the words “Yisra’el” and “Israellite” occur in the Brit Chadasha, there are only two verses in which Yisra’el couild possibly refer to the ch-rch as a whole: Gal. 6:16, where Shaul speaks of the “Yisra’el of G-d” and Rev. 7:4, where Yochanan speaks of the 144,000 seald from the twelve tribes of Yisra’el. This is saying something! Seventy-five “definites” and only two “maybes”. I wouldn’t want to side with the “maybes”!

Actually the terms “true Yisra’el” or “spiritual Yisra’el” never occur in the Bible, and it might be helpful to completely avoid using them.

As for the verses open to dispute, in Galations 6:16 the KJV, the NKJV, and the NASB all imply the same thing: “The Yisra’el of G-d” does not refer to the whole ch-rch. It refers to believing Jews. The same can be said for the description of the 144,000 sealed in Rev. 7:4. It most likely describes the harvest of the Jews worldwide. Elsewhere in the Book of Rev. “Yisra’el” means “Yisra’el” (Rev. 2:14) and “the twelve tribes” mean the “twelve tribes of Yisra’el”, as distinguished from the “twelve apostles” (Rev. 21:12-14).

Now let’s examine Rom. 2:28-29
“A man is not a Jew if he is ONLY one outwardly, nor is circumcison MERELY outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such is a man’s praise not from men, but from G-d.

Here he is directing his argument to Jews, as we can see from the context provided in Rom. 2:17-29. Within that context he is defining who the “real” Jew is- spiritually speaking.

In the greek Brit Chadasha, the word Jew occurs over 190 times. More than 190 times it definitely means a Jew nationally and ethnically. Only 2 times could it possibly mean something else. Those two times are: Rev. 2:9 & 3:9 where the reference is mae to “those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of HaSatan.”

I’m afraid my interpretation of the above verses will offend many, so I will leave it up to your interpretation.

But if someone understood Romans 2:2-20 to say that believing Gentiles were spiritual Jews (it is easy from the text to see ‘why’ many Christians believe this about themselves.) that would not change this important fact: Shaul never said that natural Jews were no longer Jews. He only said that the natural Jews were not Jews in this Special, Fuller sense. Just keep reading his letter! After making his point in Rom. 2:28-29 (remember, it is one of the few times in the entire Brit Chadasha that the word Jew is used like this), he goes back to referring to ALL Jews in the normal sense.

If you have any doubt read the next verse!

“What advantage is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? MUCH in EVERY WAY!….” (Rom. 3:1-2)

In other words, since being a Jew outwardly and physically doesn’t guarantee a right relationship with G-d, what’s the advantage in being a Jew, a physically, circumcised, ethnic Jew? Much, in every way, because G-d entrusted His Word to His physical, natural people-the Jews! It really is quite simple. If Shaul was teaching that natural Jews were no longer Jews and that believing Gentiles are not the real Jews, what in the world did he mean in Romans 3:9?

“We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.”

If Jews are not Jews and Gentiles are not Gentiles, what was Shaul trying to to say in Romans 3:29?

“Is G-d the G-d of the Jews only? Is He not the G-d of the Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too.”

And what then would be the meaning of Rom. 15:27 if believing gentiles are now Jews?

“… For if the Gentiles have shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings.”

Clearly gentile means gentile and Jew means Jew.
It is one thing to argue that once or twice Shaul used the words “Yisra’el” and “Jew” in a special sense, referring to the whle sh-rch as the “Yisra’el of G-d”, and all believers as “Jews”. (I personally disagree with this, but I certainly wouldn’t call this position dangerous) But it is another thing entirely to turn around and ignore the remaining 268 Brit Chadasha references to “yisra’el” and “jew” and claim that Yisra’el is no longer Yisra’el and Jews are no longer Jews! That most certainly is dangerous.

It is one thing to say, “Shaul used the word ‘circumcision’ in a special sense (Phil. 3:3) to refer to all believers.” It is quite another thing to say, “Those who are physically circumcised on the eigth day are no longer counted as Jews”! Even the book of Dueteronomy recognized two circumcisions; the circumcision of the heart and the physical body.

As basic as this is, later ch-rch interpreters went way beyond the meaning of the Word. First they say, “You see, it is not all who are descended from Yisra’el who are Yisra’el. It is the true believers who are Yisra’el, and we are the true believers. We are Yisra’el! It’s not just believing Jews who are Yisra’el. Everyone who simply believes is Yisra’el too!”

What is so terrible about saying this? Maybe noting so far, but the next step was simply disastrous: “If the ch-rch is spiritual Yisra’el, the new Yisra’el, then there is no need for NATURAL Yisra’el, the OLD Yisra’el anymore. They are no longer the covenant people, we are.”

Allow me to quote just one of THOUSANDS throughout history who have exemplified this attitude:

“All the blessings given to Yisra’el are now ours… forever. As for you Jews, to hell with our cursed race!” (A papal ambassador to Poland during the Holocaust)

But the ch-rch has not cursed Yisra’el. The ch-rch has cursed herself! Shaul’s exhortation must be heard again:

“Do not be arrogant, but be afraid…. I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, borthers, so that you may not be conceited.” Rom. 11:20, 25

Look at the strong words Shaul uses: arrogant, ignorant, conceited. What a critically important subject for the ch-rch to understand! Ignorance of G-d’s purposes for Yisra’el breeds conceit. And a conceited ch-rch is a ch-rch resisted by the L-rd, for “G-d opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” James 4:6

Unfortunately, many in the body today still claim that it is the ch-rch alon who is the true Yisra’el. One well known author has written at length and with great passion saying, “Wake up Ch-rch! You alone are Yisra’el!”

Why don’t we just accept the obvious meaning of the text? Why don’t we just give up all our interpretive gymnastics?

G-d is looking for believers, not acrobats.

Shalom,

Yafet

P.S. Much of the above is borrowed from Michael Brown’s book “Our Hands Are Stained With Blood” chapter 13. I highly recommend this book, but beware, tears will flow as you read the first few chapters. Blessings to all….

i think,
maybe,
you made my point?!
seems to me that a tangent was gone off on somewhere in this
i never said and will never say i a now israel, to hell with the jews,
the jewish people, are Gods people
i just strain to say that because of thegreat Love and Mercy of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the Father of the Christ Who Is Jesus of Nazareth
Saviour and Redeemer, i get the same dues, i am inherent to what ever Gopd says is for His people, because i am His! to say otherwise would make a mockery of or to the very Saving Grace that is Jesus!
so i am to believe that the Jew will hold a higher place in heaven than i, or that i will be worshipping them as well as God, that they will be blessed no matter what?
i agree they will never be wiped out as a people, but thaat is not because of how great the jewish people are, it is because of how great the God of israel is
i never wanted to seem as though i was implying tha i want to replace teh jews as you say, just join theem and love them and be in the presence of God with and for them, as would a brother, or a family member. i feel quite confronted, what with the inferences to nazis and all that?
did i wrong you brother?
forgive me, forgive me even now
let us have God between us
and with us
i think there is victory in that direction
gonna check out the rest of the posts on this thread, maybe i can get some info
peace
lijalex

 

[I’m_Lesha]

Here is the complete quote:

Yeshuayahu 56:6 "Also the sons of the foreigner Who join themselves to the L-rd, to serve Him, And to love the name of the L-rd, to be His servants-- Everyone who keeps from defiling the Sabbath, And holds fast My covenant-- 7 Even them I will bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices Will be accepted on My altar; For My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations."


​

[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]


[/font]

I don't mean to sound argumentive, but doesn't ALL nations also include Israel?

Peace and blessings,

Lesha

 

[simchat_torah]

so i am to believe that the Jew will hold a higher place in heaven than i, or that i will be worshipping them as well as God, that they will be blessed no matter what?

No to both questions.

It has nothing to do with eternal salvation, a place in heaven, etc... but what roles we fulfill in this life physically and prophetically. To say you are a Jew, that you inheret the role of the Jew, etc... is to not only steal the identity and role the Jews play but also to deny your own as a gentile.

shalom,
yafet

 

[elijahlexis]

I don't think you can compare the return of Ephraim to the return of Judah.I believe it was Nehamiah who made everyone put away their gentile wives and that's what kept them Judah

Judah was punished just like Ephraim but Judah returned from Babylon while Ephraim never returned from Assyria.Ephraim means a multitude of nations.

Anyway I keep looking for a certain scripture that says G-d will not completely do away with Judah like he did Ephraim.

i was thinking about the Lion of the tribe of Judah
if He is eternal
that would answer that question

 

[Henaynei]

Again,I might have said Jew in an earlier post but the land I and the blessing I talked about were Ephraim,I don't want to become a Jew.

Ephraim is catagoricly non Jewish and I believe they have always been considered gentile.just like Joshuah son of non was a gentiles but Caleb became a Jew.

I think the big mystery that Paul speaks about in Ephesions 2 saying his purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the Two{gentile,Jew} and in this one body to reconsile both of them to G-d through the cross.no different than the stick of Ephraim becoming one with the stick of Judah.

Jew or Epharim - it is Israel - for the passage is speaking of Jacob/Ya'acov - that is Israel not just the "Jews." Please also note that all throughout the NT when they speak of Jews they are talking about all of Israel Sha'ul was of Benyamin, what you are calling the "Northern Kingdom" or the "Lost tribes", or "Epharim." HE never made a distinction, and neither did HaShem in his time - all Israel was called Yehuda

 

[Flavius]

Jew or Epharim - it is Israel - for the passage is speaking of Jacob/Ya'acov - that is Israel not just the "Jews." Please also note that all throughout the NT when they speak of Jews they are talking about all of Israel Sha'ul was of Benyamin, what you are calling the "Northern Kingdom" or the "Lost tribes", or "Epharim." HE never made a distinction, and neither did HaShem in his time - all Israel was called Yehuda

John 10-16- I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen,I must bring them also,they too will listen to my voice and there shall be one flock.

I believe there is a distinction in Roman's 9 when Paul quotes Hosea.Hoseah is speaking to Ephraim not Judah

 

[Henaynei]

Here is the scholarship of some persons with much more knowledge and wisdom than I. This maybe be several posts long (I'll try to get it to accept as one), even if it is the "short summary" of the full paper. The full paper, which I encourage folks of all opinions to read, is here in Adobe Acrobat file format for easier use (it is 51 pages of excellent biblical scholarship and information).
******************************
The Ephraimite Error: A Short Summary





A Short Summary of "The Ephraimite Error"
A Position Paper Submitted to the International Messianic Jewish Alliance
Author: Kay Silberling, Ph.D.

Committee Members and Advisors:
Kay Silberling, Ph.D.
Daniel Juster, Th.D.
David Sedaca, M.A.

Introduction

A movement alternately known as the "Ephraimite," "Restoration of Israel," "Two-Covenant Israel," or "Two House" movement has recently gained ground in some areas among ardent Christian Zionists. Proponents of this movement contend that members of the "born-again" segment of the Christian church are, in fact, actual blood descendants of the ancient Israelites who were exiled in the Assyrian invasion of Israel in 722 B.C.E.1

Primary among the movement's spokespersons are Batya Wootten and Marshall, a.k.a. Moshe, Koniuchowsky.

Analysis

Logic and Exegetical Method

Batya Wootten and Koniuchowsky build their theology of the church as physical Israel on typological and grammatically suspect readings of the stories of the biblical patriarchs and the fall of the northern kingdom of Israel in 722 B.C.E.

A Multitude of Nations

Starting with the patriarchs, Wootten argues that Jacob's promise to Ephraim in Gen 48:19 predicted the transformation of Ephraim/Israel into Gentiles.2 Wootten claims that every time the Hebrew word, goy, is employed, it is a reference to a Gentile or a Gentile nation.3

This is incorrect. In the Hebrew Bible and the Apostolic Writings, while the word goy (English: people, nation; Greek: ethnos) may refer to a Gentile nation, it may, just as easily, refer to the nation of Israel. The term is used to refer to Israel or the Jewish people in Exod 19:6; Deut 32:28, cf. 32:45; Josh 10:12-13; Isa 1:4; Isa 26:2; Jer 31:36; Zeph 2:9.4 Note especially Jer 31:36: "'If this fixed order departs from before me,' declares the LORD, 'Then the offspring [lit. "seed"] of Israel also shall cease from being a nation (goy) before me forever.'" In the Greek Apostolic Writings, the word ethnos refers to the Jewish people in Luk 7:5; 23:2; John 11:48-52; 18:35; Acts 10:22; 24:2,10,17; 26:4; 28:19; 1 Cor 10:18; Phil 3:5. The first contention, then, that goy or goyim is always translated as Gentile or Gentiles is patently incorrect.

Because of this error, Wootten and Koniuchowsky argue that all the blessings promised to Abraham's and Joseph's physical heirs are in fact blessings promised to Gentiles. But because the premise is wrong (that goy always means Gentile), the conclusion is also wrong.

Dust of the Earth

Another major cornerstone of this teaching is that social-historical Israel, as it is traditionally perceived, cannot possibly fulfill the promises of physical multiplicity that was to equal "the sand of the sea," "the dust of the earth," or the "stars of the sky." Such a hyper-literalist reading of these phrases, which rules out their common-sense interpretation, ignores the scriptural record. For 2 Chron 1:9 states clearly that the people over whom King Solomon reigned [Israel] were "a people as numerous as the dust of the earth." Isa 10:22 also refers to the people of Israel being "as the sand of the sea" in number. Recognizing hyperbole in the Bible is not a matter of "spiritualizing" the promises as Wootten and Koniuchowsky contend. It is a matter of being knowledgeable about the rhetorical conventions used by the biblical writers.

Parallel Universes

Fundamental to Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's claims is a suspect view of history. Wootten argues that the northern Israelite tribes taken captive by Assyria in 722 B.C.E. were "never once…call[ed] Jews [italics hers]."5 For her, the exile of the northern kingdom automatically transformed that people into Gentiles.6

Wootten and Koniuchowsky hope to establish that the members of the former northern kingdom cannot possibly have been called Jews from the post-exilic period on. If successful, they then hope to ask the question as to how God could allow for 10/12ths of God's people to be annihilated. The obvious answer to this is that God could allow no such thing! They then hope to demonstrate that these "lost tribes" are indeed Christians - that they are not lost at all but have been waiting for this end-time prophetic movement to reveal their true natures. As Wootten states, "God allowed them to become lost among the nations. He allowed them to become - Gentile Israel [italics hers]."7

Wootten tries to make a strong distinction between post-exilic Judah and Israel by quoting Jeremiah speaking to "'the house of Israel and the house of Judah' (Jer 11:10)."8 Based on this phrasing, she claims that the two "houses" were distinct. As a matter of fact, while there are indeed cases in which Ephraim and Judah are referred to separately, scripture just as often uses the terms "Ephraim" and "Judah," or "Israel" and "Judah," in tandem, employing the two terms as a parallelism - a poetic way of speaking synonymously of the two groups. Thus when the Psalmist states, "God is known in Judah; His name is great in Israel," the intention is not to differentiate Israel and Judah but to equate them.9

"All Israel"

Despite their arguments, the Bible tells us that many of the northern kingdom's subjects rejoined the southern kingdom both before and after its people were exiled. Based on this, scripture makes the claim that the Jews today represent "all Israel." The term, "Gentile Israel," used by Wootten, is an oxymoron in terms of the biblical world of ideas.10

Jer 30:10 addresses the Judahite exiles (cf. Jer 29:1, 30-31) and calls them "Jacob" and "Israel." Jer 31:17-20 reports that Ephraim has repented (past tense) and describes Ephraim grieving over its own acts. Ezra 2:70 states of the returned exiles, "and all Israel lived in their cities." Zechariah addresses the same Medo-Persian returnees as "Oh house of Judah and house of Israel" (8:13; cf. 8:15) and distinguishes them from the people of the nations (Zech 8:23). It is thus not accurate to argue that references to post-exilic Judah are unique to Judah and do not apply to Israel.

Those who returned from exile referred to themselves both as Jews and as the people of Israel because they affirmed the theocratic reign of God centered in Jerusalem, the capital of the former kingdoms of united Israel and, later, Judah (Yehudah).

Thus the phrase "the Jewish people" has become the title for all of Israel. The term Jew encompassed all those who were taken into captivity by the time of the Babylonian exile, both former Israelites and Judahites, "the remnant of Israel" (Jer 31:7. Cf. Jer 50:33; Neh 12:47; Dan 9:11; Lam 2:5). By the time of the writing of Esther, the term Jew, derived from Judah, could refer to someone from the tribe of Benjamin (Esth 2:5). In the Greek Tobit 11:17, in a clear reference to the Assyrian exiles, it states, "So on that day there was rejoicing among all the Jews who were in Nineveh." This designation became so widespread that by the time of the Hellenistic period, the term Jew identified those of all the former tribes who dwelt in the diaspora and who affirmed a particular religious system. Wootten's claim that the northern Israelites were "never once called Jews" is false.11

Israel in the Apostolic Age

The Apostolic Writings reflect this Hellenistic usage. In Acts, Peter refers to his Jewish audience members as "all the house of Israel" (Acts 2:36; cf. 4:10; 5:21; 10:36; 21:28). In Acts 13:24, John proclaims his baptism of repentance "to all the people of Israel." His audience was comprised of Jews. In Acts 26:7, Paul refers to the hope of "our twelve tribes" with no reference whatsoever to Ephraim. Luke 2:36 mentions Anna as being from the tribe of Asher. Paul states that he himself is of the tribe of Benjamin (Rom 11:1; Phil 3:5). Thus some members of non-Judahite tribes still maintained a memory of their original tribal affiliations. Yeshua claims that his followers are to sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt 19:28; Luke 22:30). Their function here is that of representatives of the full twelve tribes.

In fact, the Apostolic Writings make no mention whatsoever of a gathering of lost Ephraimites. Instead, they portray the ingathering of Gentiles as a novum, an unexpected move in the history of redemption and a breaking in to the present of God's final age of redemption.

In Romans 11:7-14, Paul states that salvation has come to the Gentiles in order to make Israel jealous. If Gentile believers are Israel, then how can Israel make Israel jealous? Note that while Paul makes a clear distinction throughout his writings between Gentiles and Jews, he refers to Israel and to Jewish people interchangeably.

The Ephraimite message undermines the great power of the claims of the Apostolic Writings. It tries to change a message of hope and comfort for all peoples regardless of their heritage, regardless of their station in life, into a racist and race-based plan of salvation for those with the proper bloodlines.

Who Is Israel?

Wootten and Koniuchowsky give contradictory evidence as to how all believing Christians throughout history could be physically descended from the ancient northern Israelite exiles. At times, they argue that all people on earth are physically descended from Israel. At other times, they concede that there may indeed be "perhaps some true Gentiles" among the believers.12 Or they call believing followers of Yeshua "another 'sect' of Judaism," without any explanation as to how they can be a sect of Judaism and not Jews!13

Wootten further confuses things by declaring that Gentiles become Ephraimites only at the moment when they become "grafted in" to the olive tree of Israel and no sooner.14 Thus we see wild contradictions in the effort to explain how non-Jewish Christians today can be natural descendants of ancient Israelites.

What about genealogy? Is it statistically possible that everyone on earth is descended from one man? Only if no one but Abraham had ever produced offspring that survived - making Abraham the "new Adam." Intuitively recognizing the flaw in this argument, Wootten desperately tries out another angle, arguing that today's followers of Yeshua, although considered Gentiles, are actually physical offspring of those early Jewish and Samaritan believers.15 Thus descendants of Jews, who are not Ephraim by Wootten's own definition, have somehow become Ephraim. Not only is this inherently contradictory, but it is statistically and historically untenable. Finally, as we will see, Wootten and Koniuchowsky claim that these descendants are found primarily in the West. Yet, if one were to follow this logic, if any Christians today can make the claim to physical descent from the early Jewish followers of Yeshua, it should be Christians of North African, Egyptian, Syrian, and Palestinian descent, all non-white peoples. However, we will see that Wootten and Koniuchowsky focus their hopes primarily on white people, reserving only threats of annihilation for the Palestinians and others from this region.16

Finally, Wootten and Koniuchowsky protest repeatedly that their claims to Israelite heritage are physical and are not spiritual. Yet, the basis for their claims are often wholly subjective -- when "you knew in your 'knower,'" as Wootten claims.17 She cannot have it both ways. Either it is physical or it is spiritual. Wootten makes both contentions, but ultimately she rejects the spiritual angle and bases her argument on physical, race-based claims.

This pseudo-genealogy that Wootten and Koniuchowsky have created is a desperate and contrived one - one that exists if you "know it" in your heart. This differs drastically from the kinship groups of social-historical Israel which have shared communal memories of kinship that are supported by a rich history of literature, archaeology, and epigraphic evidence.

Parallels to Anglo-Israelism and Racial Theory

Where have these ideas of Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's come from? The sources they give are few. Koniuchowsky cites Yair Davidy as a major source, but attributes to him few specific citations.18 Neither he nor Wootten make any mention of theirs or Davidy's dependence on another probable source, the writings produced during and after the eighteenth century movement called Anglo-Israelism or British-Israelism. And it is for good reason that these sources are not mentioned, as they are popular among some American anti-Semitic groups for their pro-white, racial claims to being Israel. Wootten and Koniuchowsky make the same pro-white, racial claims.

I will list several parallels that are striking in their agreement. Both groups (Anglo-Israelites and Ephraimites) build their theories on the mythic story of the ten "lost tribes" of the northern kingdom. Both groups put great store by suspect and contrived etymologies of English words based on Hebrew. Both groups claim pre-eminent, "first-born" status as purported heirs of Ephraim. Both share an innate hostility toward Roman Catholicism and Judaism. Both proclaim that the teaching they propound is a "mystery" revealed only through their teachers. Both argue that the lost tribes migrated to areas where they eventually became known as Saxons. Both groups make mention of the nobility of anglo-Saxons as evidence for their biblical, Israelite heritage.

White Supremacy

Of most concern about the Anglo-Israelite and the "Two House" theory is the racial element found in both. Both focus primarily on the anglo-Saxon "race." Wootten uses other racial terms such as "blood-line Israelites." She is concerned about "dilut[ing] the bloodlines."19 She refers to Jews today as "biological Jews."20

Yet God's relationship with Israel is not racial. The social-historical people of Israel have never claimed racial priority as the basis for their covenant relationship to God. Jewish identity is based, not on racial deliberations but on a shared communal memory and on choice.

The same exegesis, the same contrived etymologies, the same constructed histories, the same white, Anglo-Saxon racial focus, the same arguments against the church and the Jews - the parallels are unmistakable and undeniable. Wootten and Koniuchowsky have built their "Two Houses" on the shifting sand of Anglo-Israelite theology. The concerns that this raises for Jews, whether Messianic, rabbinic, or secular, and for non-Jewish Christians are evident.

Anti-Jewish Elements in the "Two House" Theology

Certainly Wootten and Koniuchowsky are not overt Jew-haters. But their words often echo and have the same effect as those of people who hate Jews.21 Thus despite the fact that Koniuchowsky claims to be Jewish (we have not verified this), and despite his vigorous protests, there is indeed a great deal of anti-Jewish rhetoric in his and Wootten's claims. Following what has become a typical motif among Christian critics of Jews, Wootten accuses Messianic Jews of "feelings of superiority," of believing they are "'Twice Chosen,'" and of having a "false racial pride."22 The motif of the "blind Jews," a long-standing, standard motif of Christian anti-Jewish rhetoric, is there also.23 Wootten states, "They cannot hear. They cannot see. Until the Lord lifts the veil…"24 She scolds Jews, demanding that they "must accept" her own viewpoint.25 Wootten and Koniuchowsky demand to set the vision for Messianic Jews today. Wootten argues that it is only when Jews follow her teaching that they will be obedient to God, "for only then," she promises, "will you be what the Father called you to be…"26

With an irony that Koniuchowsky seems to be unaware of, he refers to his solution for the problem of Jewish and Christian relations as "the biblical final solution."27 We do not need another "final solution." The Jewish people barely survived the last one. In this, Wootten and Koniuchowsky, in their grand claims to have solved the issue of racial pride, merely replaced an old racial argument with a new one. For them, race and "bloodline" is the determining factor.

Dangers of the Movement

Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's words elicit the gravest concern in the images they construct for the future. For along with their claims to be physical Israel, they expect someday to wield territorial control over 10/12th of the ancient tribal boundaries of Israel. They create an "enemy" that includes Jews now living in regions once occupied by the ancient tribal groups, which, they contend, now belong to the Ephraimites. For the Palestinians they expect total eradication.28 In the pages of both Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's writings lies a strong assumption, sometimes stated implicitly, sometimes explicitly, that the land belongs to them (along with the Jewish people, whose portion, they contend, should be limited to 2/12ths of Israel's territory). For the "Two House" proponents, the land of Israel is "their land."29

Here again, the acorn has not fallen far from the tree. Traditionally, Anglo-Israelite thinking has also included an expectation that the land would be theirs as physical Israel.30 It evokes for us memories of the Crusaders of the 11th through 13th centuries, who also, based on the claim to be heirs of Israel, sought to take their "rightful place" as dwellers of the land through conquest and warfare.

Conclusion

The position of the I.M.J.A. is that the Ephraimite, or "Two House" movement is in error for the following reasons:

1. flawed, unwarranted, and dangerous interpretation of scripture
2. inconsistent logic and contradictions
3. racist and race-based theology
4. theology that functions in the same way as supersessionism
5. historically inaccurate depictions of Israel
6. dangerous, false, and militant claims to the land which threaten the stability of the current State of Israel

______________

1: Moshe Koniuchowsky, in "Your Arms to Israel: Updated Doctrinal Statement Reflecting Kingdom Restoration Views of the Ministry of Your Arms to Israel" (www.teshuvah.com/yati/articles/full_restoration1.htm) states, "the Jewish people have been the identifiable representatives and offspring of Judah. Non-Jewish followers of Messiah from all nations have been up to now the unidentifiable representatives and offspring of Ephraim (Zechariah 8:23)." It should be stated that Koniuchowsky would not use the term "Christian." See Moshe Koniuchowsky, "The Full Restoration of All Israel: Part 3," 8. Please note that for purposes of research, we printed out all four parts of the series, and our page number references are to that of the final printout. Because of the size of the document, we determined that it was important to have more detailed reference than just to the document as a whole.
2: Batya Ruth Wootten, The Olive Tree of Israel (White Stone, Virginia: House of David, 1992), 31. Cf. also Batya Ruth Wootten, Who Is Israel? And Why You Need to Know (St. Cloud, FL: Key of David, 1998), 16-17, 28.
3: Wootten, Who Is Israel?, 82-83, acknowledges that it sometimes refers to Israel, but she asserts that by the time of the conquest of the land by Israel, the name referred primarily to the foreign nations. This is not the case, however, for the exilic and post-exilic prophets continued to use the term to refer to Israel. Add to this the common usage of the Greek term ethnos in the Apostolic Writings to refer to Jews. Moreover, she constructs her doctrine precisely upon the use of the term goy in the pre-conquest period, during the time of the patriarchs. Thus a post-exilic reference is not historically appropriate when writing about the patriarchal period.
4: Koniuchowsky, "The Full Restoration of All Israel: Part 2," 7, argues that these references reinforce his point that Israel is Gentile. The reasoning is circular and begs the question.
5: Wootten, Olive Tree, 42.
6: Ibid., 43.
7: Wootten, Olive Tree, 43.
8: Batya Ruth Wootten, "House of David Herald: Muddled Doctrines" (http://www.mim.net/hod/hod0160/rf0160.htm, 12.
9: Examples of the use of parallelism to demonstrate that Israel and Judah are synonymous (the list is far from exhaustive) are Ps 114:2; Isa 5:7; Jer 23:6; 50:20; Hos 5:12-14; 8:14; 11:12; 12:1-2; Mic 1:5; Mal 2:11.
10: Wootten, Who Is Israel?, 93, calls the term, "Gentile Christian" an oxymoron, but has no problem using the term "Gentile Israel." Cf. Olive Tree, 43.
11: See above.
12: Koniuchowsky, "Full Restoration: Part 1," 6. But Wootten, Olive Tree, 107, remains steadfast, arguing, "It is very probable that these former Gentiles actually descend from the scattered Ephraimites that Yahveh said He would regather…Though their background may appear to be that of a Gentile, in reality, they probably are physical Israelites."
13: Wootten, "Muddled," 7.
14: Wootten, Olive Tree, 106.
15: Wootten, Olive Tree, 9, 106. See also "Muddled," 8; Who Is Israel?, 97.
16: Cf. p. 6.
17: Ibid., 119.
18: Koniuchowsky, "Full Restoration: Part 2," 12.
19: Wootten, Olive Tree, 52; "Muddled," 5; Who Is Israel?, 73.
20: Wootten, "Muddled," 4.
21: Cf. Lloyd Gaston, Paul and the Torah (Vancouver, Univ. of British Columbia, 1987).
22: Wootten, Olive Tree, 2. Cf. also "Muddled," 10; Who Is Israel?, 104-105.
23: Cf. Rosemary Ruether, Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, reprt. 1997), 121 135. In 135, she reminds us that the cathedrals built during the Medieval period often included statuary images of two women, representing Church and Synagogue. The one representing the Church looked alive and full of power. The one representing the Synagogue looked sad and always wore blindfolds over her eyes. For an example of this identical motif in Anglo-Israelism, see John Wilson, Sixty Anglo-Israel Difficulties Answered: (http://www.abcog.org/wilson2.htm, Difficulty 15, 6.
24: Ibid., 92.
25: Wootten, Olive Tree, 124.
26: Ibid., 125. Cf. also Koniuchowsky, "Full Restoration: Part 3," 6.
27: Koniuchowsky, "Full Restoration: Part 3," 4.
28: Koniuchowsky, "Full Restoration: Part 4," 8; Wootten, Olive Tree, 36.
29: Koniuchowsky, "Full Restoration: Part 2," 5.
30: Wilson, Difficulty 3, 4, contended that the land is lying desolate without them and looked forward to the time when "the mountains were to shoot forth their branches, and bear their fruit for the people of Israel." Cf. also Difficulty 20, 13

 

[Flavius]

I aint never heard of this Wooten dude but what he is saying aint the same thing I'm saying.I don't believe the physical descendents of Ephraim will ever be found.I have heard of British israelism,maybe that's what Wotten is,even Hyslop believed Mannessah and Ephraim to be America and Britain.

What I'm saying is Ephraim is the second born who always portrays the spirit and as such you can only be grafted into Ephraim in the spirit,I serously doubt the flesh will ever be found.There are distinctions between the two kingdoms,I see it in the Prodicle son and all over the bible.I think we are just gonna disagree on this point thats all.I just don't see how in the world you can call yourself of Israel in such a broad statement having no distinct place to go.We are floating without a tribe and have no inheritance in Israel and from what I can tell,you believe you will never live in Israel.

 

[Yael]

I'm certainly dizzy following this thread. It's time for yum yums.

 

[Flavius]

3 or 4 years ago,I had never heard the word Messianic but all of the sudden somehow I had this crazy hunger that I have no idea how it came.At just the metion of Jerusalem brought tears to my eyes and seeing people being killed in Israel ruined so many days.The hunger I have aint natual and is completely ill-logical,people began to call me a Jew wannabe.Words like Jewish roots kept coming up,people keep saying,get back to ur Jewish roots.I used to see them as Jewish roots but I no longer do.Where I live is so much in opposition to my traditions and I feel the only place I could possibly feel at home is in Israel surrounded by people that at least have the same festivals.

Now this don't proove anything but I know with every fiber of my being that I have this hunger that completely changed my life because one day I will live in Israel.I can't see it any other way.It would have been much easyer for me to have stayed like I was before,a gentile happy with gentile ways but for ssome reason this aint the case.If I don't have a right of return,I'm just another gentile,not ephraim,not Judah.When the city of Jerusalem comes down from heaven,I will be one of those people not allowed in the city.A fire has been lit in so many people.i see so many christians crying at Jewish weddings now in Messianic churches.It's like you feel special all the sudden.The fire I have inside me is burning so strong and it is almost impossible for me to consider myself a gentile.I really feel that I was called out to be a particular person unlike the nations,A peculiar people

 

[Flavius]

No time in history exept maybe the first church have there been so many gentiles taking on the traditions of Hashem.So many wanna be Jews as they call me while trying to insult me.I believe with all my heart that this is calling of Ephraim to return.I think the fire that is within these people was put there for a reason,not just to be laghed at because this is exactly what happens when you speak of Sukkot in a crowd.What have I gained in keeping the Sabboth or celebrating Sukkot? What have I gained for respecting Torah if I'm a gentile and that's it.I have done all these things for nothing and I have come no closer to being Jacob.

 

[Henaynei]

I have done them simply and purely to obey HaShem borne out of love and a servant's gratitude, and not for personal gain or acceptance or land or affilation, not for any special feeling or approval or "specialness. I did it to serve and give, not to gain.

 

[simchat_torah]

After what I felt was a disruption in this thread and the topic at hand, and I subsequently left. I think now there is simply too much to address, and I don't think you'll get me to respond at this point because there's literally dozens and dozens of posts to make issue with.

I just wanted to explain my absence from here, and to basically state I won't be back here. Now if a different thread were started, that would be a different story all together

shalom,
yafet

 

[Flavius]

After what I felt was a disruption in this thread and the topic at hand, and I subsequently left. I think now there is simply too much to address, and I don't think you'll get me to respond at this point because there's literally dozens and dozens of posts to make issue with.

I just wanted to explain my absence from here, and to basically state I won't be back here. Now if a different thread were started, that would be a different story all together

shalom,
yafet

Nice of you to pop in and offer to starightn things out but I have no desire to continue on this subject or for that matter this forum.

I really liked this place but now I'm so ashamed of myself cause it's seems the only thing I accomplished is really making alot of people mad,making you mad enough to lash out and subsequently run Plan 9 out.

It's funny cause I really thought you people would agree with how I believed,heck I thought most Messianics did believe that way.Oh well I can't help but think what y'all think about me now and I really like to joke around more than anything but I can't see joking around and fellowshipping with people that think I'm crazy trying to replace somebody.No hard feelings though,just against myself.I really did enjoy talking with all you guys but I guess Messianic Judaism aint for me either.The sad thing is that you people seem to be in every other forum I go to

I originally got this crazy idea from Eddie Chumney at the Hebraic institute and his book...Who is the bride of Christ.

Ever notice how ducks always fly in a v formation and the right side is always longer than the left? Ya know why? Theres more ducks on that side.