Challenging the Eschatological View that America is God's New Israel

[PaladinValer]

Mostly what goes on in this forum is a never ending conflict between futurists, historists, and amils.

I advocate a separate futurist only end-times forum. No change to this forum.

Which, with all due respect, I would would happen.

You haven't made any arguments against my view with any biblcal verses to say otherwise - you have only called my view conspiracy theory.

Doug

Premillennialism was declared to be unorthodox back in the 4th century by the undivided Church. Why say otherwise?

Your futurism isn't even based on any ancient interpretation of Holy Scripture and attempted to make sense of the world under an illogical paradigm. It has no place in orthodox Christianity.

Amillennialism is the only eschatological belief that existed from the Early Church that was not declared unorthodox and never was disrupted. It is therefore orthodox based simply on the fact that it is historic and continuative.

 

[Douggg]

Which, with all due respect, I would would happen.



Premillennialism was declared to be unorthodox back in the 4th century by the undivided Church. Why say otherwise?

Your futurism isn't even based on any ancient interpretation of Holy Scripture and attempted to make sense of the world under an illogical paradigm. It has no place in orthodox Christianity.

Amillennialism is the only eschatological belief that existed from the Early Church that was not declared unorthodox and never was disrupted. It is therefore orthodox based simply on the fact that it is historic and continuative.

You are arguing "ism's". Those are derivatives. I am addressing the verses themselves. What are your bible verses that challenge my view and supports yours that there is no end times Roman Empire in bible prophecy? Present an argument.

Doug

 

[PaladinValer]

You are arguing "ism's". Those are derivatives. I am addressing the verses themselves. What are your bible verses that challenge my view and supports yours that there is no end times Roman Empire in bible prophecy? Present an argument.

As I said; the issue is with your interpretation, which I said is not ancient, which implies that there are ancient interpretations that I do agree with.

It isn't with the text itself but the interpretation thereof.

As such, I don't need to post "Scriptural proof" as that isn't the issue.

 

[Douggg]

As I said; the issue is with your interpretation, which I said is not ancient, which implies that there are ancient interpretations that I do agree with.

Using the bible, show why my interpretation is wrong.

Doug

`

 

[PaladinValer]

Using the bible, show why my interpretation is wrong.

Doug

`

Straw Man. The issue isn't with the Bible but its interpretation.

It is a conspiracy theory that the UN or the EU has anything to do with the End Times, fuels by nothing more than rematerialized premillennialism combined with American Nationalism.

That's truth; I stick to it.

Eventually there will be a single government over the whole world, and I cannot wait for it to occur.

 

[interpreter]

Straw Man. The issue isn't with the Bible but its interpretation.

It is a conspiracy theory that the UN or the EU has anything to do with the End Times, fuels by nothing more than rematerialized premillennialism combined with American Nationalism.

That's truth; I stick to it.

Eventually there will be a single government over the whole world, and I cannot wait for it to occur.

I agree, sort of. Soon the earth will be ruled by 24 Christian thrones as a single government. They could be called the new Israel.

 

[Douggg]

Straw Man. The issue isn't with the Bible but its interpretation.

Using the bible, show why there is not a end times Roman Empire in Daniel 2, the feet of iron and clay.

Eventually there will be a single government over the whole world, and I cannot wait for it to occur.

What? Why? And what are your bible verses for a single government over the whole world?

Doug

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Shalom

For anyone interested..

It has been the case in the U.S that many have long advocated for the ideology that God somehow sees the U.S as a "New Israel" of sorts - predominately due to the viewpoint that the U.S was founded on Christian principles and that its expansion has arisen as a means of supernatural blessing.

However, from what I've studied, it seems the U.S has never, at ANY point, been God’s covenant nation who operates with Divine sanction. That was reserved for Israel...and even then, the U.S has already had a wide range of things done in the name of the nation that've never been a part of God's heart ( more shared in #501 ).

When you understand the roots of how things develop, it seems to make sense of many factors. Many, due to their eschatological view of a "Christian U.S" developing where a theocracy under God arises, seem to feel that the U.S needs to be fought for - and "brought back" to it's heritage.

However, I wonder, if supporting a theocracy, if that theocracy others may want would support those who are Indigenious peoples/"First Nations" people who are believers. FOr it often seems that discussion of theocracy often leaves out the fact that many Native Americans and others are often not considered as those who'd be leading the way if they trusted in Christ.

For more information, the Puritans originally came to America in order to gain freedom of religion, freedom from the persecution that they were experiencing at the hands of an antagonistic Church of England. And so they fled. In their fleeing they encountered all kinds of hardship and tribulation, and yet they endured and finally made it to the ‘Promised Land’. It was these kinds of experiences, and the relative success of establishing a new nation, that imbued Puritan pastors and theologians with the notion that Divine Providence had carried them into the new land of promise. Indeed, many (if not all) of the Puritans believed that they were truly the new Israel of God, and that they had been given Divine sanction to sack the native Americans (like the original Israel did with the Canaanites), and take their lands (manifest destiny)

Many tend to have a postmillennial view of heritage that believes that America has its rootage in Divine favor and blessedness—as God’s covenant people [As a side note, the interesting thing about this is that most American's who appeal to this age as constituting a "Christian" heritage to our nation are not postmillennial, but premillennial dispensationalists, which is completely at odds with postmil thought]. And it is this kind of mindset that believes that America is exceptional, that is, because we have been blessed of God (as his covenant nation), and thus we can offer things to the rest of the world (even if that means that we, in a utilitarian and pragmatic way impose ourselves on other nations for the greater good; i.e. which is the preservation of God’s new Israel, America) that the rest of the world needs. By the logic of others, we are the dispensers of God’s covenant promises after all

. But people fail to realize that other nations have been exceptional as well and it's theological error trying to assume that a nation being exceptional at many points is either exceptional at ALL points or "exceptional" according to the standards of the Lord. ....and as it concerns God rulling the nation, one would have to see a radical shift where God is honored at ALL points in order for any talk on theocracy established by men to be possible.



A school of thought existing doesn't equate to it being historically valid or accurate. It simply means that it exists. And for anyone interested, there's actually a good book on the issue entitled "Between Babel and the Beast" addressing the issue very well (more here ).

​

And for more, one should consider investigating the work of Roger Olson who has provided a mini and partial review of Peter Leithart’s book, Between Babel and the Beast. (more here ).Leithart challenges a religion that he (amongst others) has labeled Americanism (or the worship of America as God’s special nation, like the new Israel). Moreover, for others who've spoken on the issue. One is Soong-Chan Rah in his work The Next Evangelicalism: Releasing the Church from Western ... - Page 449..and another is Andrea Smith of Native Americans and the Christian Right: The Gendered Politics of Unlikely Alliances.

As the Late Richard Twiss said best:

Richard Twiss: A Theology of Manifest Destiny​

Richard Twiss: Hope For the American Church​

If anyone here has any thoughts, I'd love to hear sometime....

False arguments. There is no connection between the birthright promises of wealth and power given to Joseph and the spiritual promises, the sceptre, given to Judah. These promises were unconditional, unlike the old covenant between God and Israel, and were to be fulfilled after the death of Christ, in the last days.

Scoffers have deliberately misinterpreted what is plainly written, then imposed conditions that must obtain if God were to raise up Israel, conditions not imposed by God himself. A classic strawman.

Note that the last days refer to a large sweep of time while the end-times will be a very few years in duration. So eschatologically speaking many of the promises given to the tribes of Israel might have been fulfilled long before the end-time.

The OP erroneously places last days prophecies into the end-time. We know when the last days began, we don't yet know about the end-time as only fulfilled prophecies can reveal it.

Yet we can look for the fulfillment of last days prophecies concerning Joseph and others, as they will be unmistakable.

 

[ebedmelech]

Shalom

For anyone interested..

It has been the case in the U.S that many have long advocated for the ideology that God somehow sees the U.S as a "New Israel" of sorts - predominately due to the viewpoint that the U.S was founded on Christian principles and that its expansion has arisen as a means of supernatural blessing.....


If anyone here has any thoughts, I'd love to hear sometime....

Here's the problem with that whole idea...

God's people COLLECTIVELY (meaning all Christians), are to consider themselves as "aliens and strangers in the world"...wherever we live in the world.

The church has replaced Israel as God's light to the world.

When Jesus gave the beatidues, He was addressing Israel and He told them "You are the light of the world". Now fast forward. Christ has been raised and ascended to the Father, and the church is in full swing. Paul then tells us that we Christians are lights in Phillipians 2:14-16:
14 Do all things without grumbling or disputing;
15 so that you will prove yourselves to be blameless and innocent, children of God above reproach in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you appear as lights in the world,
16 holding fast the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I will have reason to glory because I did not run in vain nor toil in vain.

Peter then tells us we are a "holy nation and a royal priesthood". Therefore, there is no one nation God is using. He's using His people in all these nations collectively.

Certainly we can see with discernment, that Jesus has used America greatly, but He has used other nations to throughout church history.

America has created a facade religiously. Just as we as people can think too much of ourselves, this country thinks too much of itself. America never has and never will be a Christian nation; it's founde on Christian principles, no doubt, but Christian??? NOT EVEN!!!

 

[OldWiseGuy]

British Israelism is psuedohistory, psuedoscience, and is a racist theology that is impossible to reconcile with Christianity.

It belongs in the same bin as other conspiracy theories like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the secret library under the Vatican, and Barack Obama being a non-citizen or being a Muslim.

British Israelism is first a misnomer. That Britian, and particularly England is the predominant tribe where last days prophecy is concerned gave rise to the erroneous thought that all of the New Israel was invested in that country. Also is the mistaken idea that Israel would appear as a unified nation as in OT times.

The truth is that God scattered the tribes of Israel, 'destroying' them from ever becoming a contiguous nation again. However, their captivity by the Assyrians and expulsion from their land left all of the 'last days' prophecies unfulfilled. And in any case those last days prophecies couldn't and wouldn't be fulfilled until after the death of Christ, which heralded the beginning of the 'last days'.

God's promises of race, the birthright promises of wealth and power, were unconditional and didn't depend on the 'righteousness' of the Israel. It's like a promise you make to another. That person could be a murderer, but you still must fulfill your promise.

Another mistake is to tie a resurrected Israel to the church. God issued a separate promise in that regard, to the Jews only.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

False arguments. There is no connection between the birthright promises of wealth and power given to Joseph and the spiritual promises, the sceptre, given to Judah. These promises were unconditional, unlike the old covenant between God and Israel, and were to be fulfilled after the death of Christ, in the last days.

Scoffers have deliberately misinterpreted what is plainly written, then imposed conditions that must obtain if God were to raise up Israel, conditions not imposed by God himself. A classic strawman.

None of that deals at all with scripture - and thus, it is a false rebuttal. Nothing in scripture says the promises were without conditions anymore than saying someone who is Jewish is automatically going to be saved or with blessings...and on the issue of Joseph, as said before, there's zero connection between Joseph in the Bible (including his sons Ephraim and Manasseh ) and claiming the U.S is representative of that - as was already noted to you in the other thread you first brought it up (as seen in #56 from the thread entitled Confederate States of America: What Would've Happened if the South Won the Civil War. )

Note that the last days refer to a large sweep of time while the end-times will be a very few years in duration. So eschatologically speaking many of the promises given to the tribes of Israel might have been fulfilled long before the end-time.

The OP erroneously places last days prophecies into the end-time. We know when the last days began, we don't yet know about the end-time as only fulfilled prophecies can reveal it.

Yet we can look for the fulfillment of last days prophecies concerning Joseph and others, as they will be unmistakable.
.

Never was there at any point in scripture a concept that the end-times was separate from the Last Days - and that is an assumption that people have to go into the text assuming. And promises fulfilled doesn't equate to changes never occurring. Again, false scenarios lead to false solutions - as have been the case with what was said in opposition to the OP when not dealing with what scripture has said...and that also goes for forgetting what happened with Joseph ALREADY occurred in fulfillment within the OT - whereas others wanting to make it something for today have to make up things that have nothing to do with how Joseph/his expansion was ever seen.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Here's the problem with that whole idea...

God's people COLLECTIVELY (meaning all Christians), are to consider themselves as "aliens and strangers in the world"...wherever we live in the world.

The church has replaced Israel as God's light to the world.

When Jesus gave the beatidues, He was addressing Israel and He told them "You are the light of the world". Now fast forward. Christ has been raised and ascended to the Father, and the church is in full swing. Paul then tells us that we Christians are lights in Phillipians 2:14-16:
14 Do all things without grumbling or disputing;
15 so that you will prove yourselves to be blameless and innocent, children of God above reproach in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you appear as lights in the world,
16 holding fast the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I will have reason to glory because I did not run in vain nor toil in vain.

Peter then tells us we are a "holy nation and a royal priesthood". Therefore, there is no one nation God is using. He's using His people in all these nations collectively.

Certainly we can see with discernment, that Jesus has used America greatly, but He has used other nations to throughout church history.

America has created a facade religiously. Just as we as people can think too much of ourselves, this country thinks too much of itself. America never has and never will be a Christian nation; it's founde on Christian principles, no doubt, but Christian??? NOT EVEN!!!

Excellent points, especially as it concerns the reality of God's people being collectively present throughout the entire world and EVERY nation - as opposed to being focused in one. There was more discussed elsewhere on that very point - as seen in the thread entitled Why support the nation of Israel? ( here /#267 )

As it concerns Israel itself, Isaiah 50:1 reads...

"Thus saith the LORD, Where is the bill of your mother's divorcement, whom I have put away? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away." ​

​

In Isaiah 50:1, God is asking Israel if He has ever been unfaithful? God reminds the Jews that He has never divorced Israel; but Israel did abandon God. God never divorced Israel...and the Lord was hurt and angry because Israel had abandoned Him.

Romans 11:1-5 clearly teach that God did NOT divorce Israel...

"I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace."
​

We read in the Old Testament book of Hosea that he never divorced Gomer for her continued adultery and unfaithfulness. .....for . Hosea pictures God, Who is longsuffering and forgiving (II Peter 3:9).

Some could consider Jeremiah 3:8 as showing how the Lord divorced Israel...

"And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also."

​

Doesn't Jeremiah clearly say that God divorced Israel? Of course...although it seems best to see divorce as a seperation from them AS A NATION; but not as His people. This Scripture must be reconciled with Hosea's refusal to divorce Gomer and the Scriptures in Romans 11:1-5. God divorced the NATION of Israel (as termination of a business agreement); but NOT His children (saved Jews). For God never forsakes His own (Hebrews 13:5)...and because of Israel's rebellion, God instead decided to turn to the Gentiles to do His business of preaching the Gospel (and they did); but God never divorced His own.

Sadly, many in Replacement Theology assume that the Church has REPLACED Israel---although anyone understanding of Messianic Judaism realizes that the Church was meant to exist alongside Israel and what the Lord would do through her. Both Israel and the Church have UNIQUE Roles to play in His Kingdom---with both being considered collectively as "THE BRIDE" of Christ since all people trusting in the Lord are His beloved He'll return for ( John 3:28-30, Revelation 19:6-8/ Revelation 19 /Revelation 21:8-10 /Revelation 22:16-18 ...more discussed here and here in #113 on the that reality of what Christ meant when he told the Apostle Paul "On this rock I'll build my Church" and what "all Israel will be saved" means)....and yet the ways that Israel and the Church act operate before the Lord are like two differing brides before Him with their own type of relationship. Dr.Michael Brown spoke on the subject at length, as seen here...and here. Additionally, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum (another Messianic Jewish/Hebrew Christian) of Ariel Ministries shared more on the issue as well....as seen here.

Dr. Fruchtenbaum has taught his Israelology course for Chafer Theological Seminary and it was recorded at West Houston Bible Church in Texas. The entire course is available free online at the Dean Bible Ministries website. Audio files can be downloaded or heard online here/ here ):

• Israelology – Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum – Recorded at Chafer Theological Seminary

 

[Gxg (G²)]

British Israelism is psuedohistory, psuedoscience, and is a racist theology that is impossible to reconcile with Christianity.

It belongs in the same bin as other conspiracy theories like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the secret library under the Vatican, and Barack Obama being a non-citizen or being a Muslim.

So true...

So i think that America is the tribe of Ephraim in the "regeneration." Matt.19;28

Do ya think you can make those pictures a little larger? My eye sight isn't as good as it used to be.




.

Most of those pictures and the ideology behind them were actually covered/addressed elsewhere in other discussion, LittleLamb...if going to the thread entitled Racist when the sentiments behind those pictures and others were addressed due to how they were in connection with groups like StormFront (one of the largest white supremacy groups in existence) and the poster was debunked by several for commentary that exalted white people and labeled others as less.

 

[PaladinValer]

Using the bible, show why there is not a end times Roman Empire in Daniel 2, the feet of iron and clay.

The Straw Man continues...

What?

Yes; you heard me right...I said that eventually there will be a one world government and I cannot wait for it to happen.

Why?

It implies the eventual end of racial, ethnic, and other national boundaries, bringing people into a true respect for one other.

And what are your bible verses for a single government over the whole world?

I don't need one, nor did we need one for any other major event in world history with an ultra-rare few exceptions.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

None of that deals at all with scripture - and thus, it is a false rebuttal. Nothing in scripture says the promises were without conditions anymore than saying someone who is Jewish is automatically going to be saved or with blessings...

The only conditions were the proper identity of the recipients. When I die my kids only have to identify themselves to receive their inheritance. They don't have to be 'righteous'.

Never was there at any point in scripture a concept that the end-times was separate from the Last Days - and that is an assumption that people have to go into the text assuming.

John begs to differ.

1 John 2:18

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

The problem is that most Christians think that Armeggedon has to be happening for it to be the 'last days'.

And promises fulfilled doesn't equate to changes never occurring. Again, false scenarios lead to false solutions - as have been the case with what was said in opposition to the OP when not dealing with what scripture has said...and that also goes for forgetting what happened with Joseph ALREADY occurred in fulfillment within the OT - whereas others wanting to make it something for today have to make up things that have nothing to do with how Joseph/his expansion was ever seen.

The promises made to Joseph in Genesis 48, 49 and in Deuteronomy 33 were never fulfilled in ancient Israel.

The 'sceptre' promise to the Jews was fulfilled in Christ, and also ended when he, 'Shiloh', came. Recall that 'his own (the Jews) received him not', and, 'I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel', the so-called 'lost tribes'. The Christians of today are the very ones Christ was sent to, the remnants of the house of Israel.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

The only conditions were the proper identity of the recipients. When I die my kids only have to identify themselves to receive their inheritance. They don't have to be 'righteous'.
l.

Again, none of that is remotely Bible - and it does nothing when scripture is avoided on the issue.

John begs to differ.

1 John 2:18

Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

Wrong - and scripture should be used in context before trying to bring it up for whatever discussion arises. Nothing in the scripture noted that the End times were separate from the Last times since the two were seen as simultaneous - for the moment Christ left, the End times/last times began.

The promises made to Joseph in Genesis 48, 49 and in Deuteronomy 33 were never fulfilled in ancient Israel.

Incorrect - seeing that the land was taken, the descendants prospered and saw God work. One has to avoid history to say otherwise. The natural blessing was for Ephraim and Manasseh to multiply like fishes (Numbers 26:34, 37). It became a blessing among Israelites. At one time Ephraim numbered 40,500 men able to bear arms; Manasseh numbered 52,700, and was permitted additional land besides his brother west of Jordan to the sea. The blessing was that they should "grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth", in the core of the land of their inheritance. And as we look at the map of Canaan as divided among the Tribes we see Ephraim and Manasseh have their inheritance in the midst of Joseph's own sons

The 'sceptre' promise to the Jews was fulfilled in Christ, and also ended when he, 'Shiloh', came. Recall that 'his own (the Jews) received him not', and, 'I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel', the so-called 'lost tribes'. The Christians of today are the very ones Christ was sent to, the remnants of the house of Israe

Again, none of that deals with scripture - as Christ still reigns/is the scepter and has NEVER lost. And his own have received him continually (Messianic Jews and Jews of the early church and others throughout the centuries who trusted in Him) - even though other Jews did not. There's a context to the Lost House of Israel that needs to be kept in mind...

First, the tribes were never "lost" since they are spoken of in the NT often - as it was a matter of the tribes being scattered.

Secondly, by citing good actions of some Samaritans and Gentiles and by summoning the Jews to repentance and love, Jesus incurred the wrath of many of His countrymen. Along this same pattern He once reminded His countrymen in His own town of Nazareth of two Old Testament incidents: During a famine in Israel the prophet Elijah aided not the widows of Israel but a widow at Zarephath (a Gentile..1 Kings 17:1); a little later the prophet Elisha helped not the lepers of Israel but the leper Naaman the Syrian (a Gentile)...seen in 2 Kings 5:1 . Hearing these incidents, Jesus' own countrymen became furious with Him when read the Scroll/noted that salvation came to the Gentiles (Luke 4:25-28)...as in the eyes of many Jews, Gentiles did not deserve salvation as they did (similar to how Jonah felt with Assyria when the Lord called Him to preach so that they'd repent). God directed both of these prophets, great prophets of God to the Children of Israel, to help individual Gentiles. Do not these prophets supply an Old Testament precedent for Jesus' action among a few individual Samaritans and Gentiles?

One of these actions concerned the Canaanite woman, to whom, as already noted, Jesus had said: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." ( Matthew 15:21-28 ). In addition we see the passage regarding Jesus and the Roman centurion ( Matthew 8:5-10 ).

While reiterating that Jesus said that He was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, we note also the following:

• 1. Jesus healed both Gentiles in need of healing
• 2. Both the centurion and the woman realized their unworthiness before Jesus. What is explicit in the account of the Canaanite woman is implicit in the account about the centurion: Jesus' ministry is to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Both were fully aware that they did not belong to the house of Israel and that Jesus had the right to reject their requests
• 3. Both demonstrate a faith which was unparalleled among the Children of Israel. It is this kind of faith that Jesus looked for and which He honored. Such a faith always receives what it wants, for it wants God's will (John 15:7, 1 John 5:19). Jesus told neither of them to follow Him.

Should we be surprised that Jesus followed the precedents of Elijah and Elisha in helping Gentiles, especially Gentiles of such faith? By abiding by His practice that He was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, should He have ignored their pleas? It does seem possible that these exceptions proved His rule of limiting His ministry to the house of Israel.

Further we should note Jesus' additional words to His disciples after He has instructed them to "go nowhere among the Gentiles, and ... the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel":

"Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of men; for they will deliver you up to councils, and flog you in their synagogues, and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear testimony before them and the Gentiles." (Matthew 10:16-18)

​

Again we are faced with the paradox: Jesus sends His disciples exclusively to the lost sheep of Israel; yet before them (in their synagogues) and the Gentiles they "bear testimony". Is this testimony simply a judicial testimony, words issuing from the disciples before kings and judges in the form of a court defense only?

Even if this were the case, still an abundance of evidence in the Gospel accounts indicates an understanding of a more positive participation of the Gentiles in God's Kingdom and the role of Jesus in this Gentile participation. This understanding is related to a host of references in the Old Testament regarding the future destiny of the Gentiles:

"And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed,
and all mankind shall see it together,
for the mouth of the Lord has spoken." (Isaiah 40:5)
​

"Listen to me, my people,
and give ear to me, my nation;
for a law will go forth from me,
and my justice for a light to the peoples." (Isaiah 51:4)

Arise, shine; for your light has come,
and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you,
For behold, darkness shall cover the earth
and thick darkness the peoples;
but the Lord will arise upon you
and His glory will appear over you.
And nations shall come to your light,
and kings to the brightness of your rising. (Isaiah 60:1-3)
​

The Lord has bared His holy arm
before the eyes of all the nations;
and all the ends of the earth shall see
the salvation of our God. (Isaiah 52:10)

It shall come to pass in the latter days
that the mountain of the house of the Lord
shall be established as the highest of the mountains,and shall be raised above the hills; and all the nations shall flow to it.... (Isaiah 2:2, cf. vs. 3, 4)

On this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of fat things, a feast of wine on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wine on the lees well refined. And He will destroy on this mountain the covering that is cast over all peoples,the veil that is spread over all nations. He will swallow up death for ever, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of His people He will take away from all the earth, for the Lord has spoken. (Isaiah 25:6-8)
​

This outreach among the Gentiles is closely bound with the mission of the Servant of the Lord:

Behold my servant, whom I uphold,
my chosen, in whom my soul delights;
I have put my Spirit upon him,
he will bring forth justice to the nations. (Isaiah 42:1; cf. vs. 2-9)
​

It is further said about this servant that

He poured out his soul to death,
and was numbered with the transgressors;
yet he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:12; cf. Isaiah 52:13-53:12)

​

The Gospel accounts identify this servant as Jesus in unmistakable terms (Matthew 12:15-21). After Jesus has spoken to His disciples about His own suffering and the greatness of service, He concludes:

"For the son of Man (Jesus) also came not to be served but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many." (Mark 10:45)
​

Later, He dies

not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. (John 11:52; cf. 1 John 2:2)
​

And it is to these sheep that Jesus refers when He says:

And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd. (John 10:16)

​

Yeshua was not just King over Israel--but literally King of the ENTIRE WORLD and the Nations (long before anything of Israel even came up). He identified with the Samaritan people (i.e. woman at the well in John 4, Luke 9, etc), the demoniac who was healed in Gentile territory in Mark 5 and many other places. Apart from that, scripture was very explicit about the ways that the Lord chose to work in other nations outside of Israel just as He did with others within Israel.

But he always held Israel as being special and distinct from the Gentiles. Something that has always tripped me out is considering what the Lord did with Hagar the Egyptian ( Genesis 16:1-3, Genesis 21:8-10 , Genesis 25:11-13, etc )---and Egypt, by connection. For as the Lord proclaimed over Egypt by the prophet Isaiah:

Isaiah 19:19-23
​

​

19 In that day there will be an altar to the LORD in the heart of Egypt, and a monument to the LORD at its border. 20 It will be a sign and witness to the LORD Almighty in the land of Egypt. When they cry out to the LORD because of their oppressors, he will send them a savior and defender, and he will rescue them. 21 So the LORD will make himself known to the Egyptians, and in that day they will acknowledge the LORD. They will worship with sacrifices and grain offerings; they will make vows to the LORD and keep them. ...
23 In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria. The Assyrians will go to Egypt and the Egyptians to Assyria. The Egyptians and Assyrians will worship together. 24 In that day Israel will be the third, along with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing on the earth. 25 The LORD Almighty will bless them, saying, “Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance.”

​

Egypt was deemed to be amongst the people of the Lord alongside Israel--and Egypt called the Lord's people, a group that'd worship the Lord and be just as blessed as Israel was. With regards to "highway," compare the references to the highway to Jerusalem in Isaiah 11:16 and Isaiah 35:8-10. Isaiah 57:14 nd Isaiah 62:10 also describe the removal of obstacles and the construction of a highway to Jerusalem. The Egyptians and the Assyrians (often noted as enemies of Israel, even though Egypt was often used to save God's people) had been loggerheads for years (Isaiah 20:4), but in the future they would be linked in a bond of fellowship sealed by their common allegiance to Israel's Lord (Isaiah 25:3). And with the altar in Egupt, some scholars relate "altar" to the temple built in Egypt by the Jewish high priest Onias IV, who fled to Egpt during the second century B.C. But more appears to have been at stake in Isaiah 19:19. Indeed, the reference appears to be to a conversion to the Lord of a significant number of Egyptians.

The Lord made plain in His Word that the Egyptians would be a people whom He'd use mightly for His glory. With Egypt, the Lord expressed its entire admission to religious privileges (Ro 9:24-26; 1Pe 2:9-10, etc). When it came to His working with the Hebrews in the conquest of Cannan, it has always been interesting to consider how the intended recipients of salvation were not only Jews, but also Israel’s most hostile enemies! Assyria, Egypt, Babylon, and Philistia are included (Psalm 87:4-6; Isaiah 19:23-5). Even the Canaanites whom Israel fought against were incorporated into the new Israel, the true people of God (Zechariah 9:6 [the “Jebusite,” who has been assimilated into Israel]; cp. Matthew 15:22). ..


Even prior to all of that, the children of Israel were blessed through the land of Egypt when it came to what the Lord did through Joseph----who married an Egyptian woman, shaved his beard, had mixed children who were both Hebrew/Egyptian and adopted by Jacob, and had an Egyptian name (Genesis 41-42). As seen in Genesis 46–50, he brothers returned to Palestine and brought their father to Egypt In Israel's meeting meeting with the Pharaoh, Jacob pronounce a blessing on the Pharaoh (47:7–12)....and honored him. And in the death of Jacob (Genesis 49-50), all of Egypt (including Pharoah) came to mourn his loss and gave him the treatment of embalming (per the requests of Joseph) that was reserved for royalty. There were signs of relationship and interaction between Israel/other groups...

Moreover, the Lord noted to Israel how they were not to despise the Egyptians...and that they'd be welcome to come into the assembly of the Lord ( Deuteronomy 23:6-8 ). As the Messiah also recieved salvation in Egypt when Joseph and Mary fled there for protection in Matthew 2, it is highly interesting to consider the many ways the Lord has always used that group for his work...

 

[Literalist]

Response to the OP


Response to the OP:

The British/Israel theology is a ruse

Herbert W. Armstrong and his earlier mentors were totally off course with their theology and there are still splinter groups who hold to his teachings today

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Response to the OP


Response to the OP:

The British/Israel theology is a ruse

Herbert W. Armstrong and his earlier mentors were totally off course with their theology and there are still splinter groups who hold to his teachings today

Indeed..it's a pity whenever you see others holding to the same mindsets today.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

The natural blessing was for Ephraim and Manasseh to multiply like fishes ([/FONT]Numbers 26:34, 37). It became a blessing among Israelites. At one time Ephraim numbered 40,500 men able to bear arms; Manasseh numbered 52,700, and was permitted additional land besides his brother west of Jordan to the sea. The blessing was that they should "grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth", in the core of the land of their inheritance. And as we look at the map of Canaan as divided among the Tribes we see Ephraim and Manasseh have their inheritance in the midst of Joseph's own sons

This was never fulfilled in ancient Israel,

Deuteronomy 33:

13 And of Joseph he said, Blessed of the Lord be his land, for the precious things of heaven, for the dew, and for the deep that coucheth beneath,

14 And for the precious fruits brought forth by the sun, and for the precious things put forth by the moon,

15 And for the chief things of the ancient mountains, and for the precious things of the lasting hills,

16 And for the precious things of the earth and fulness thereof, and for the good will of him that dwelt in the bush: let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the top of the head of him that was separated from his brethren.

17 His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

Note that Ephraim outnumbers Manasseh.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

This was never fulfilled in ancient Israel,

Deuteronomy 33:

13 And of Joseph he said, Blessed of the Lord be his land, for the precious things of heaven, for the dew, and for the deep that coucheth beneath,

14 And for the precious fruits brought forth by the sun, and for the precious things put forth by the moon,

15 And for the chief things of the ancient mountains, and for the precious things of the lasting hills,

16 And for the precious things of the earth and fulness thereof, and for the good will of him that dwelt in the bush: let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and upon the top of the head of him that was separated from his brethren.

17 His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

Note that Ephraim outnumbers Manasseh.

And it should be the case that Ephraim outnumbers Manasseh as he was blessed more. Again, nothing there shows where the Lord did not fulfill what he desired for Joseph. The central part of Western Palestine fell to the children of Joseph; and, while the boundaries of the territory allotted to Ephraim and Manasseh respectively are given in Joshua 16/Joshua 17:1. The first census on leaving Egypt had it where Ephraim's men of war numbered 40,500; and at the second census they are given as 32,500 (Numbers 1:33; Numbers 26:37). The head of the tribe at the Exodus was Elishama, son of Ammihud (Numbers 1:10)...

With the standard of the tribe of Ephraim on the West of the tabernacle in the desert march were Manasseh and Benjamin (Numbers 2:18) - and the Ephraimite among the spies was Hoshea (i.e. Joshua), the son of Nun (Numbers 13:8). At the division of the land Ephraim was represented by prince Kemuel, son of Shiphtan (Numbers 34:24) - and the future power of this tribe is again foreshadowed in the Blessing of Moses (Deuteronomy 33:17). When Moses died, a member of the tribe, Joshua, whose faith and courage had distinguished him among the spies, succeeded to the chief place in Israel. Consequently, it is not surprising that the scene of national assemblies, and the center of the nation's worship, should be chosen within the land occupied by the children of Joseph, at Shechem and Shiloh respectively. The leadership of Ephraim was further emphasized by the rule of Samuel. From the beginning of life in Palestine they enjoyed a certain prestige, and were very sensitive on honor (Judges 7:24; Judges 8:1; Judges 12:1). They were dominant in the days of the Kings ..and God kept his word

• Parashat Vayechi - Ephraim and Menasseh - Hebrew for Christians

As said best at Jewish Encylopedia:

Thenceforth the history of Ephraim is merged in that of the Northern Kingdom, in which it remained the dominant factor, so that, especially in figurative speech, its name came to be used for the state of the Ten Tribes (Isa. vii. 2-5, 8; Hosea v. 3, 5, 9; vi. 4, and elsewhere). In II Chron. xv. 8-11 the secession of Ephraim is denounced as a forsaking of the God of its fathers and of His laws. II Chron. xxx. 1, 10, 18 describes the irreligion of Ephraim in mocking the emissaries of Hezekiah, come to invite them to keep the Passover in Jerusalem, and concludes the account by reporting the destruction of all the idolatrous appointments by the pious celebrants, "even in Ephraim [and Manasseh]." Josiah is credited with despatching an embassy on a similar errand (II Chron. xxxiv. 6, 9).

​

History wise, Ephraim took precedence over that of Manasseh by virtue of Jacob's blessing (Gen 41:52; Gen 48:1). The descendants of Joseph formed two of the tribes of Israel, whereas each of the other sons of Jacob was the founder of only one tribe. Thus there were in reality thirteen tribes; but the number twelve was preserved by excluding that of Levi when Ephraim and Manasseh are mentioned separately (Num 1:32; Jos 17:14, Jos 17:17; Ch1 7:20). Territory of. At the time of the first census in the wilderness this tribe numbered 40,500 (Num 1:32, Num 1:33); forty years later, when about to take possession of the Promised Land, it numbered only 32,500.

During the march, Ephraim's place was on the west side of the tabernacle (Num 2:18). When the spies were sent out to spy the land, "JOshea the son of Nun" of this tribe signalized himself. The boundaries of the portion of the land assigned to Ephraim are given in Jos 16:1. It included most of what was afterwards called Samaria as distinguished from Judea and Galilee. It thus lay in the centre of all traffic, from north to south, and from Jordan to the sea, and was about 55 miles long and 30 broad. The tabernacle and the ark were deposited within its limits at Shiloh, where it remained for four hundred years.

During the time of the judges and the first stage of the monarchy this tribe manifested a domineering and haughty and discontented spirit. It was not till the close of the first period of Jewish history that God 'refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim, but chose the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved' (Psa 78:67, Psa 78:68). When the ark was removed from Shiloh to Zion the power of Ephraim was humbled. Among the causes which operated to bring about the disruption of Israel was Ephraim's jealousy of the growing power of Judah. From the settlement of Canaan till the time of David and Solomon, Ephraim had held the place of honour among the tribes. It occupied the central and fairest portions of the land, and had Shiloh and Shechem within its borders. But now when Jerusalem became the capital of the kingdom, and the centre of power and worship for the whole nation of Israel, Ephraim declined in influence. The discontent came to a crisis by Rehoboam's refusal to grant certain redresses that were demanded (1 Kings 12).