Essential Differences Between Dispensational and Non-dispensational Futurism

[keras]

That the tribe of Ephraim still exists; God only knows who and where they are, as proved by Hosea 11:8-12

Your arguments are based on dispensationalism

Right, So many are taught the theory of a general Jewish redemption, which is an unbiblical teaching. It is a vital part of the 'rapture to heaven' of the Church false theory.

The confusion about Israel being still God's people is caused by not understanding who is the true Israel today. An Israelite, [as contrary to an Israeli] is an individual who Overcomes the world for God.
There are actually a few Israelis, who are also Israelites. They are the remnant; Romans 9:27

When we Christians go to live in all of the holy land, there we will be assigned to one of the twelve tribes. As Revelation 7:1-14 tells us

 

[RandyPNW]

Again, you’re avoiding the implications of Zechariah 10:7-9; Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23, and Matthew 13:24-30.

In so doing you’re missing the historical and scriptural evidence that said texts are addressing for the most part the northern kingdom of Israel, Ephriam, not a mere tribe and not simply the southern kingdom of Judah. The northern kingdom was led captive by Assyria and in Christ’s time the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus wrote that "there are but two tribes in Asia and Europe subject to the Romans, while the ten tribes are beyond Euphrates till now, and are an immense multitude, and not to be estimated by numbers". It was the descendants of Ephraim that Peter ministered to in his epistles as they were the ordained “nation” that bears the fruit of the vineyard in Matthew 21:43.

Your arguments are based on dispensationalism and its perception of Romans 11. As the texts in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Hosea, and the parables of Christ affirm, Paul’s statement that “all” of Israel shall be saved when their partial hardening ends can only be rightly interpreted as the number of the elect is complete at the time the Church’s probation closes. The dispensationalist’s perception that God resumes redemption of the descendants of Israel at Christ’s return cannot stand against Zechariah 10:7-9; Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23, and Matthew 13:24-30. God has been redeeming the elect descendants of Ephraim and Judah through the Church and New Covenant since the first advent and their number is complete when Judah’s hardening is lifted.

As to the AOD, the defilement of the sanctuary is bound to the little horn and by your own admission the Romans were instrumental in its fulfillment and that the horn also plays a part at the second advent, you actually support that the little horn represents an ancient entity, in support of Historicism.

Since I don't know you at all, I'm not sure what position you're coming from? But I disagree with much that you say here. You say I'm basing my beliefs on Dispensationalism. But I'm not a Dispensationalist! So that isn't true. You say I base things on Rom 9-11. That is at least partly true, because it is Scripture after all.

But I base my beliefs on a lot more than that. I base much of my beliefs on what I call the "Jewish Hope," which is the Prophets' description of Israel's final deliverance from Gentile oppression, or pagan oppressors.

The Salvation of all Israel, mentioned by Paul in Rom 11, does not make sense the way you're presenting it. I used to hold to that view, for lack of anything else. But I was never at peace with that view. It never made sense to me.

But now, after reading the Scriptures for many years, I understand that it all boils down to the "Jewish Hope." It's Israel's hope of final political deliverance, which happens at a time when they are unworthy of it--Eze 36 and Zech 12-14.

Much of Israel is brought under final judgment, along with the rest of the world, based on their intransigence and opposition to God's word. And so the bad leadership in Israel is destroyed, leaving a remnant that will repent at Jesus' Coming.

Jesus is coming back to Israel to save Israel from the judgment they have brought upon themselves. He will save and restore the remnant that repents, and will rebuild a new Christian nation around them. This is a political salvation, that is sustained by Christian repentance at the coming of Jesus.

None of the other Scriptures you cited counters my position. I'm aware of all of the Scriptures. We can deal with the Olivet Discourse at another time.

 

[RandyPNW]

Randy, what triggers the beginning of the Great Tribulation - according to Jesus, in Matthew 24:15-22 ?

What triggers it is Jesus' declaration that it will happen in his generation due to the sins of that generation.

It is the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place, spoken of by the prophet Daniel.

No, the AoD is not the trigger. It is the punishment that Jesus predicted would come upon the Jewish nation in his generation.

So in Daniel 12:11-12, the abomination of desolation is in place 1335 days, the length of the Great Tribulation.

Actually, in Daniel there are two, and not just one, AoDs. We shouldn't confuse them. One has to do with Antiochus 4, when he committed atrocities in Jerusalem and at the temple. He defiled it by favoring those Jews who committed apostasy, and worhipped idols. The more orthodox Jews he murdered. This was spoken of in Dan 8 and 11-12.

The other AoD was spoken of in Dan 9, and had to do with the Roman Army that would come against Jerusalem and the temple in the generation of Messiah. This is the AoD Jesus referred to, and the one we are told refers to Daniel. It started the Great Tribulation of the Jewish People, mentioned in both Dan 12 and the Olivet Discourse, and it was "great" precisely because it has been the longest punishment in Israel's history--an entire age! It will end with the defeat of Antichrist.

In Judaism, being a Jew goes by if the mother is a Jew. What tribe goes by the father. Most Jews themselves don't know what tribe they are of. They believe when the messiah comes, he will identify for them what tribe they are of.

As I've said before, the Jewish tribes disappeared, as a matter of importance centuries ago, when Israel became a full nation and a Kingdom, and especially when the northern and southern kingdoms went into captivity. The tribes were still relevant as genealogies in some respects, but for all intents and purposes, the tribes no long had strict borders, and the people mingled together into the "Jewish People." The restoration of the Jewish People is, in effect, the fulfillment of all 12 tribes.

Yes, Jews embrace as Jews those born of Jewish mothers. The religion is passed down that way to the children, along with natural ancestry. But there are many Jews with Jewish fathers alone who still hold to the Jewish religion. They are legitimate Jews, as well. Any convert to the Jewish faith makes one a legitimate Jew.

Biblically speaking though, Ezekiel 37:19-22, is where it is prophesied the rejoining of the northern kingdom (the ten tribes) with the southern kingdom (the two tribes) back at one kingdom, no longer two nations. In verse 22.

Sometimes future prophecies contain information that requires certain events have had to be fulfilled earlier in history. The restoration of national Israel requires that the New Covenant had already come into effect 2000 years earlier. The salvation of national Israel at the 2nd Coming requires that the 2 kingdoms of Israel and Judah be reunited millennia before that, because there couldn't be two separate promises with two separate fulfillments.

So these prophecies that are fulfilled at the 2nd Coming make references to events that were necessary as preliminary fulfillments, and have nothing to do with the 2nd Coming at all. They were ancillary prerequisites, and so were included in the prophecies with the main focus being on the time of the 2nd Coming.

There is nothing that said the New Covenant and the union of the 2 Kingdoms of Israel and Judah would take place *at the same time* as the 2nd Coming of Jesus. They were merely necessary to bring the full body of that fulfillment into perspective at the 2nd Coming.

The 1967 year is the basis for the parable of the fig tree generation as Jerusalem came back into the hands of the Jews. The fig tree representing Jerusalem, because Jesus cursed a fig tree beside the road, as he was entering Jerusalem, knowing that generation of Jews would reject him as their king.

The "fig tree" can represent Israel, but in this case, it represents Israel ripening for judgment, by producing the green leaves of Christianity, just before being destroyed. It represented, therefore, the destruction of Israel, with its preliminary signs pointing to that destruction.

These "birth pains" signaled a birth that was still born, and never happened. Instead, Israel faced the AoD, the Roman prince, and was destroyed in 70 AD. "This generation will not pass away before all these things happen," Jesus said. And it did. The temple and the city fell in the generation of Jesus' apostles.

 

[Douggg]

What triggers it is Jesus' declaration that it will happen in his generation due to the sins of that generation.

No, the AoD is not the trigger. It is the punishment that Jesus predicted would come upon the Jewish nation in his generation.

Matthew 24:
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: )

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

The other AoD was spoken of in Dan 9, and had to do with the Roman Army that would come against Jerusalem and the temple in the generation of Messiah. This is the AoD Jesus referred to, and the one we are told refers to Daniel. It started the Great Tribulation of the Jewish People, mentioned in both Dan 12 and the Olivet Discourse, and it was "great" precisely because it has been the longest punishment in Israel's history--an entire age! It will end with the defeat of Antichrist.

The AoD is in Daniel 12:11-12. To be at the time of the end, Daniel 12:4.

 

[RandyPNW]

Matthew 24:
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand: )

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.

19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!

20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:

21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Again, the AoD does *not* trigger the Great Tribulation. The clearest definition of what the "Great Tribulation" was is in Luke 21, where Jesus called it a "Jewish Punishment." It is not the martyrdom of Christians under Antichrist, which is how it is popularly defined today!

The AoD, in accordance with Dan 9, is the "people of the ruler to come," which was the Roman Army. They destroyed "the city and the sanctuary" in the generation in which "Messiah is cut off."

Various punishments of Israel were identified and even timed in the Bible. The Wilderness Generation suffered the tribulation of 40 years. The Generation of the Babylonian Captivity suffered the tribulation of captivity for 70 years. The "greatest" tribulation Israel is to suffer in all of history is for the *entire NT era!*

Jesus, contrary to popular opinion and modern prophecy enthusiasts, Jesus identified this Great Tribulation as God's wrath against the Jewish People, lasting from the fall of the temple in their generation to the 2nd Coming.

The AoD is in Daniel 12:11-12. To be at the time of the end, Daniel 12:4.

That AoD refers to Antiochus 4. I describe ch. 12 of Daniel as sort of a summary chapter. Daniel is asking about all of these visions he's received, and God summarizes them most important of them as being the rise of Antiochus 4, which was not far off, and the rise of Antichrist, which will be at the end of the age.

Antichrist's rule is identified as 3.5 years in Dan 12, and afterwards Antiochus' reign is identified as 1290 days, which is a little longer than the 1260 days of Antichrist's rule.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

Since I don't know you at all, I'm not sure what position you're coming from? But I disagree with much that you say here. You say I'm basing my beliefs on Dispensationalism. But I'm not a Dispensationalist! So that isn't true. You say I base things on Rom 9-11. That is at least partly true, because it is Scripture after all.

But I base my beliefs on a lot more than that. I base much of my beliefs on what I call the "Jewish Hope," which is the Prophets' description of Israel's final deliverance from Gentile oppression, or pagan oppressors.

The Salvation of all Israel, mentioned by Paul in Rom 11, does not make sense the way you're presenting it. I used to hold to that view, for lack of anything else. But I was never at peace with that view. It never made sense to me.

But now, after reading the Scriptures for many years, I understand that it all boils down to the "Jewish Hope." It's Israel's hope of final political deliverance, which happens at a time when they are unworthy of it--Eze 36 and Zech 12-14.

Much of Israel is brought under final judgment, along with the rest of the world, based on their intransigence and opposition to God's word. And so the bad leadership in Israel is destroyed, leaving a remnant that will repent at Jesus' Coming.

Jesus is coming back to Israel to save Israel from the judgment they have brought upon themselves. He will save and restore the remnant that repents, and will rebuild a new Christian nation around them. This is a political salvation, that is sustained by Christian repentance at the coming of Jesus.

None of the other Scriptures you cited counters my position. I'm aware of all of the Scriptures. We can deal with the Olivet Discourse at another time.

I surmise you're skimming the texts I cite. Study them; “meditate day and night” on them, please.

Let me further expound: The OT prophets foresaw Christ’s first advent as the punishment of the shepherds (plural) and the scattering of the sheep, as in Zechariah 13:7. Matthew 26:31. The shepherd (singular) in Zechariah is Christ, inasmuch as the prophets overwhelming ascribe the “shepherd that is smitten” as the first advent phenomenon of Christ. We can’t have Christ smitten when he returns. Concomitantly, the prophets overwhelmingly ascribed Christ’s second advent as a day of vengeance and gathering of His people, which Zechariah 12 and 14 relate. So, I don’t buy the dispensational belief that Zechariah 12-14 represents the second advent. Zechariah is not in chronological order any more than Daniel.

Zechariah 10 further affirms that Christ came to save Ephriam and then sow them in the world in agreement with Zechariah 13:7. This scattering or sowing is precisely what Christ depicts in his parables because they are rooted in what the prophets saw in this age, which vindicates historicism’s presupposition that the Old Testament prophecies, prophecy in general, unfold uninterrupted. Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, and Hosea 2:14-23––all prophecy of the redemption and sowing of both houses, especially Ephraim. And redemption precedes the gathering in all of them. It follows that the gathering at the close of probation is for “all” of Israel, including its grafted branches. Preterism and futurism are uprooted by Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23––the source of Christ’s parables.

Furthermore, futurists and preterists overlook that the Church (the true Israel) is subject to falling away, prophesied in 2 Thessalonians 2:2-3 and other NT passages. (The seven churches in Revelation 2-3 also portray general apostasy in the Church.) It is folly to overlook the OT precedent that punishment or trials follow apostasy for the Church as well, which is what John’s Revelation is about. There is sufficient agreement that the chronology of the church is reflected in the seven churches.

Again, your arguments are based on dispensationalism and its perception of Romans 11. As the texts in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Hosea, and the parables of Christ affirm, Paul’s statement that “all” of Israel shall be saved when their partial hardening ends can only be rightly interpreted as the number of the elect is complete at the time the Church’s probation closes. The dispensationalist’s perception that God resumes redemption of the descendants of Israel at Christ’s return cannot stand against Zechariah 10:7-9; Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23, and Matthew 13:24-30. God has been redeeming the elect descendants of Ephraim and Judah through the Church and New Covenant since the first advent and their number is complete when Judah’s hardening is lifted.

 

[RandyPNW]

I surmise you're skimming the texts I cite. Study them; “meditate day and night” on them, please.

I've studied and meditated on them *for years!*

Let me further expound: The OT prophets foresaw Christ’s first advent as the punishment of the shepherds (plural) and the scattering of the sheep, as in Zechariah 13:7. Matthew 26:31. The shepherd (singular) in Zechariah is Christ, inasmuch as the prophets overwhelming ascribe the “shepherd that is smitten” as the first advent phenomenon of Christ. We can’t have Christ smitten when he returns.

OT prophecies of Christ did not always distinguish between 1st and 2nd Coming. Zech 13 does refer to a single element in Christ's 1st Coming, but it is setting up the precedent for his 2nd Coming in judgment. There is no effort to establish a timetable separating the two comings. But Zech 12-14, generally, is focused upon the end of the age.

Zechariah 10 further affirms that Christ came to save Ephriam and then sow them in the world in agreement with Zechariah 13:7.

Many of the Prophets who spoke of the endtimes focused more attention on their own time. This laid out the history of Israel under the Law, which speaks to the Church today in matters of Christian morality.

The Prophets were not largely engaged in speculations about the distant future. What value would that be? So when they were in fact instructed to prophesy about the future, they made it clear that they were doing so.

At other times, in fact most times, they realized they were speaking to their contemporaries about the need to repent. The minister's first responsibility is to his present listeners, to his contemporaries. He may write a book that will minister to others in the future. But his primary task are those who will read his book in his own time.

This scattering or sowing is precisely what Christ depicts in his parables because they are rooted in what the prophets saw in this age, which vindicates historicism’s presupposition that the Old Testament prophecies, prophecy in general, unfold uninterrupted.

Well, that's not how I generally define historicism. Certainly prophecy has to be rooted in some history, namely in the history that fulfils it. The only problem is, we can err in identifying the history that fulfils a particular prophecy.

Look at all of the errant predictions about the Antichrist. Some thought Rome was the Antichrist--others thought Mohammad was the Antichrist. The Reformers thought the RCC was the Antichrist, others Napoleon, or Hitler, etc. Such is the fate of historicism. A pet fulfillment is established in the past, and it may be wrong.

Don't get me wrong. At some point prophecy is, in fact, fulfilled in a particular historical event. We just need to ensure we aren't assigning things prematurely.

Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, and Hosea 2:14-23––all prophecy of the redemption and sowing of both houses, especially Ephraim. And redemption precedes the gathering in all of them. It follows that the gathering at the close of probation is for “all” of Israel, including its grafted branches. Preterism and futurism are uprooted by Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23––the source of Christ’s parables.

Are you then advocating for Replacement Theology? I suppose you are? "All of Israel" does not included the "grafted branches" in Paul's theology. Paul was using a symbol of OT reality, in which Israel, the tree, could graft on foreigners as "branches," making them part of Israel.

It was just a metaphor. We don't all become citizens of Israel!

As for Ephraim, that was a reference to the Northern Kingdom of Israel before the Assyrian Captivity. Ephraim's fulfillment in the NT era is not as a tribe, but as being mixed in with all the Jewish People.

Furthermore, futurists and preterists overlook that the Church (the true Israel) is subject to falling away, prophesied in 2 Thessalonians 2:2-3 and other NT passages.

I'm not a Dispensationalist, but I am a futurist and a believer in Israel's final national restoration. I'm not a Preterist, but I do believe Israel's worst historical punishment began with the Abomination of Desolation, which was the Roman Army that desolated Jerusalem and the temple.

I do *not* believe the Church replaced Israel as the "People of God." Israel failed in their calling to be the People of God. But Hosea indicates that they will once again be called "My People."

Again, your arguments are based on dispensationalism and its perception of Romans 11.

I'm not a Dispensationalist. And I should base my arguments and beliefs on Rom 11.

As the texts in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Hosea, and the parables of Christ affirm, Paul’s statement that “all” of Israel shall be saved when their partial hardening ends can only be rightly interpreted as the number of the elect is complete at the time the Church’s probation closes.

It's not my job to make you believe otherwise. It's only my job to testify to what I believe to be true. And I believe you're wrong for the reasons given. You can believe what you think is right.

The dispensationalist’s perception that God resumes redemption of the descendants of Israel at Christ’s return cannot stand against Zechariah 10:7-9; Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23, and Matthew 13:24-30.

I know all of the Scriptures, and they not only allow my beliefs to continue to stand, but they teach those very beliefs, in my opinion. But we have to follow our own road. I wish you well on the journey.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

I've studied and meditated on them *for years!*



OT prophecies of Christ did not always distinguish between 1st and 2nd Coming. Zech 13 does refer to a single element in Christ's 1st Coming, but it is setting up the precedent for his 2nd Coming in judgment. There is no effort to establish a timetable separating the two comings. But Zech 12-14, generally, is focused upon the end of the age.



Many of the Prophets who spoke of the endtimes focused more attention on their own time. This laid out the history of Israel under the Law, which speaks to the Church today in matters of Christian morality.

The Prophets were not largely engaged in speculations about the distant future. What value would that be? So when they were in fact instructed to prophesy about the future, they made it clear that they were doing so.

At other times, in fact most times, they realized they were speaking to their contemporaries about the need to repent. The minister's first responsibility is to his present listeners, to his contemporaries. He may write a book that will minister to others in the future. But his primary task are those who will read his book in his own time.



Well, that's not how I generally define historicism. Certainly prophecy has to be rooted in some history, namely in the history that fulfils it. The only problem is, we can err in identifying the history that fulfils a particular prophecy.

Look at all of the errant predictions about the Antichrist. Some thought Rome was the Antichrist--others thought Mohammad was the Antichrist. The Reformers thought the RCC was the Antichrist, others Napoleon, or Hitler, etc. Such is the fate of historicism. A pet fulfillment is established in the past, and it may be wrong.

Don't get me wrong. At some point prophecy is, in fact, fulfilled in a particular historical event. We just need to ensure we aren't assigning things prematurely.



Are you then advocating for Replacement Theology? I suppose you are? "All of Israel" does not included the "grafted branches" in Paul's theology. Paul was using a symbol of OT reality, in which Israel, the tree, could graft on foreigners as "branches," making them part of Israel.

It was just a metaphor. We don't all become citizens of Israel!

As for Ephraim, that was a reference to the Northern Kingdom of Israel before the Assyrian Captivity. Ephraim's fulfillment in the NT era is not as a tribe, but as being mixed in with all the Jewish People.



I'm not a Dispensationalist, but I am a futurist and a believer in Israel's final national restoration. I'm not a Preterist, but I do believe Israel's worst historical punishment began with the Abomination of Desolation, which was the Roman Army that desolated Jerusalem and the temple.

I do *not* believe the Church replaced Israel as the "People of God." Israel failed in their calling to be the People of God. But Hosea indicates that they will once again be called "My People."



I'm not a Dispensationalist. And I should base my arguments and beliefs on Rom 11.



It's not my job to make you believe otherwise. It's only my job to testify to what I believe to be true. And I believe you're wrong for the reasons given. You can believe what you think is right.



I know all of the Scriptures, and they not only allow my beliefs to continue to stand, but they teach those very beliefs, in my opinion. But we have to follow our own road. I wish you well on the journey.

Obviously, you posted on this thread to critique my opening post, so it's only fitting I analyze your critique and presuppositions for their deficiencies.

You have yet to acknowledge that the texts I promote, predict that both houses, especially Ephraim, are redeemed and sown in the world prior to their gathering at the second advent.

In Zechariah 10 he prophesies that God will sow Ephraim “among the people: and they shall remember me in far countries; and they shall live with their children, and turn again.”

In Jeremiah 31 he prophecies that God will “sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast,” in agreement with Zechariah 10.

In Ezekiel 34 he prophecies that God will make “a covenant of peace” with the sheep that were lost and scattered and “set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.” The shepherd is none other than Christ and it is he that causes the lost and scattered sheep to “dwell safely in the wilderness” in agreement with Jeremiah 31 and Zechariah 10.

In Isaiah 49 he prophecies that, “Though Israel be not gathered,” God tasks the Servant, who Is Christ, “to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel” and to be “a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.” This is in agreement with Jeremiah 31, Zechariah 10, and Ezekiel 34.

In Hosea 2 he prophecies that Ephriam is allured “into the wilderness” where they are “betrothed” to Christ, and where he declares “I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy,” in agreement with Jeremiah 31, Zechariah 10, Ezekiel 34; and Isaiah 49.

The sowing in these passages is what Christ bases his parable of the sowing of the “good seed” in Matthew 13:24-30, which affirms the sowing as a first advent phenomenon, contrary to your assertion: “OT prophecies of Christ did not always distinguish between 1st and 2nd Coming.”

The point being is that those who truly meditate on God’s word are able to properly decern between passages in the OT that pertain to the first advent and those that pertain to the second. Those that pertain to the first have the shepherd Christ smitten, and the sheep scattered in accord with Zechariah 13:7, 10:7-9; Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23, and Matthew 13:24-30.

Furthermore, according to Zechariah 11:13-14, at the time Judas casts the “thirty pieces of silver” into “the house of the LORD” (he who has wisdom see Matthew 27:3-5) God breaks “the brotherhood between Judah and Israel,” which exposes your error that Ephriam is identified by God as “the Jewish people” in this age. This enmity continues until Christ’s return, which is established in Isaiah 11:12-13 and Ezekiel 37:19-23. I prefer to agree with God's word, not make up my own narrative.

Your critique that, “Ephraim's fulfillment in the NT era is not as a tribe, but as being mixed in with all the Jewish People,” does not stand against someone who truly meditates on the word day and night.

And your notion that “Israel failed in the calling to be the People of God” does not stand against Paul’s testimony that Israel did not fail for, “the election hath obtained it” even as those ordained to reject the cornerstone were hardened. Romans 11.

As to replacement theology, show us where preterists promote what I do! You can’t because what I promote exposes the folly of replacement theology. The church did not replace Israel; the church is the means by which God redeems the elect descendants of both houses of Israel while sown in the world in this age, especially the elect descendants of Ephraim.

 

[RandyPNW]

Your critique that, “Ephraim's fulfillment in the NT era is not as a tribe, but as being mixed in with all the Jewish People,” does not stand against someone who truly meditates on the word day and night.

So you claim you meditate on the Lord's word whereas I don't? Again, you don't know me. I've been studying and meditating on God's word since the early 70s. Nothing you say here is new to me. As I said, I believe the tribes are gone and undistinguishable. And that's true, whether you meditate on God's word or not.

So you need to face reality when meditating on God's word to see if you're coming up with the right conclusions. There are no tribes of Israel any more! If you think so, you're living on another planet.

So this is how I've had to deal with these passages of Scripture. And yes, they require some thought. Ephraim and the northern Kingdom are specifically referenced as being a part of a future restoration of Israel. To exclude them would be to exclude part of Israel and many of the tribes in the North from participation in a full Israeli restoration.

Many Christian scholars and Jews believe the Northern Kingdom, along with Ephraim, perished in the Assyrian Captivity. Josephus and others may have thought there were still Jews left from that captivity in his own time, but they were no longer distinct tribes. And eventually, all of them either merged in with their host countries or they joined up with later Jewish groups in exile. They all became, in effect, "the Jewish People."

So yes, though these tribes, like Ephraim, were mentioned specifically, their hope lay not in their own tribe, but in their own tribe's participation in the prophesied "nation." That, after all, was what God originally promised Abraham--not an eternal set of 12 tribes, but rather, a nation after the heart of Abraham. The 12 tribes were preliminary to setting up the nation.

And your notion that “Israel failed in the calling to be the People of God” does not stand against Paul’s testimony that Israel did not fail for, “the election hath obtained it” even as those ordained to reject the cornerstone were hardened. Romans 11.

I'm not a Replacement Theologian. The same prophecy that stated Israel failed to be "God's People" also stated that they would be reinstated as God's People.

As to replacement theology, show us where preterists promote what I do! You can’t because what I promote exposes the folly of replacement theology. The church did not replace Israel; the church is the means by which God redeems the elect descendants of both houses of Israel while sown in the world in this age, especially the elect descendants of Ephraim.

As I said, I don't know you and don't yet recognize your positions. I'm left to sort of guess what you're trying to prove. You brought a lot of passages, but what you're trying to prove by them seems a little convoluted and mixed up between various schools of thought. Maybe I'll figure it out over time if you don't like the labels?

I don't know why you're asking about Preterism? Are you a Preterist? If you don't believe in Replacement Theology it sounds to me that you're still using some of their arguments. In a nutshell, I'm confused by your points, and am having trouble locating where they fit into various systems of theology.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

So you claim you meditate on the Lord's word whereas I don't? Again, you don't know me. I've been studying and meditating on God's word since the early 70s. Nothing you say here is new to me. As I said, I believe the tribes are gone and undistinguishable. And that's true, whether you meditate on God's word or not.

So you need to face reality when meditating on God's word to see if you're coming up with the right conclusions. There are no tribes of Israel any more! If you think so, you're living on another planet.

So this is how I've had to deal with these passages of Scripture. And yes, they require some thought. Ephraim and the northern Kingdom are specifically referenced as being a part of a future restoration of Israel. To exclude them would be to exclude part of Israel and many of the tribes in the North from participation in a full Israeli restoration.

Many Christian scholars and Jews believe the Northern Kingdom, along with Ephraim, perished in the Assyrian Captivity. Josephus and others may have thought there were still Jews left from that captivity in his own time, but they were no longer distinct tribes. And eventually, all of them either merged in with their host countries or they joined up with later Jewish groups in exile. They all became, in effect, "the Jewish People."

So yes, though these tribes, like Ephraim, were mentioned specifically, their hope lay not in their own tribe, but in their own tribe's participation in the prophesied "nation." That, after all, was what God originally promised Abraham--not an eternal set of 12 tribes, but rather, a nation after the heart of Abraham. The 12 tribes were preliminary to setting up the nation.



I'm not a Replacement Theologian. The same prophecy that stated Israel failed to be "God's People" also stated that they would be reinstated as God's People.



As I said, I don't know you and don't yet recognize your positions. I'm left to sort of guess what you're trying to prove. You brought a lot of passages, but what you're trying to prove by them seems a little convoluted and mixed up between various schools of thought. Maybe I'll figure it out over time if you don't like the labels?

I don't know why you're asking about Preterism? Are you a Preterist? If you don't believe in Replacement Theology it sounds to me that you're still using some of their arguments. In a nutshell, I'm confused by your points, and am having trouble locating where they fit into various systems of theology.

The tribes are not distinguishable to you––but they are to God.

And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea, Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. (Revelation 7:1-4)​

They, the tribes of Israel, are distinguishable to God up to the very end.

Again, according to Zechariah 11:13-14, at the time Judas casts the “thirty pieces of silver” into “the house of the LORD” (he who has wisdom see Matthew 27:3-5) God breaks “the brotherhood between Judah and Israel,” which exposes your error that Ephriam is identified by God as “the Jewish people” in this age. This enmity continues until Christ’s return, which is established in Isaiah 11:12-13 and Ezekiel 37:19-23. I prefer to agree with God's word, not make up my own narrative.

Your critique that, “Ephraim's fulfillment in the NT era is not as a tribe, but as being mixed in with all the Jewish People,” does not stand against someone who truly meditates on the word day and night.

Again, show us where preterists promote what I do! You can’t because what I promote exposes the folly of replacement theology. The church did not replace Israel; the church is the means by which God redeems the elect descendants of both houses of Israel while sown in the world in this age, especially the elect descendants of Ephraim.

And I do believe I stated my goals at the onset: to relate the differences between non-dispensational futurism and dispensational futurism, and why neither can be justified by the Bible. In showing those differences and their deficiencies historicism is confirmed as the only eschatological model that avoids such pitfalls.

 

[keras]

This enmity continues until Christ’s return, which is established in Isaiah 11:12-13 and Ezekiel 37:19-23.

I agree with most of your posts.
But the fulfilment of Isaiah 11:12-13 and Ezekiel 37:19-23, is prophesied to happen before Jesus Returns. Proved by how all of God's people are present in the holy Land during the end times. Daniel 7:25, Revelation 13:1-8

 

[Jerryhuerta]

I agree with most of your posts.
But the fulfilment of Isaiah 11:12-13 and Ezekiel 37:19-23, is prophesied to happen before Jesus Returns. Proved by how all of God's people are present in the holy Land during the end times. Daniel 7:25, Revelation 13:1-8

I agree that the enmity is abated just prior to Christ's return. The citations sure expose Randy's view that God made no distinction between Ephraim and Judah in this age as fuel for the fire (1 Corinthian 3:15).

 

[RandyPNW]

The tribes are not distinguishable to you––but they are to God.

This is a fallback position without any rational basis for saying it. If so, you might try looking elsewhere, as I did.

And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea, Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel. (Revelation 7:1-4)​

They, the tribes of Israel, are distinguishable to God up to the very end.

Not at all. I explained this to you, from my perspective. The tribes are important only insofar as they represent the fulfillment of *all Israel.* Tribal distinctions are unimportant. What's important is that they all equally share in the inheritance. So the numbers are, I think, symbolic. And we know that because the idea is traced back to Eze 40-48 where Ezekiel had a vision of a temple that was purely symbolic. It has and will not ever be built.

Again, according to Zechariah 11:13-14, at the time Judas casts the “thirty pieces of silver” into “the house of the LORD” (he who has wisdom see Matthew 27:3-5) God breaks “the brotherhood between Judah and Israel,” which exposes your error that Ephriam is identified by God as “the Jewish people” in this age. This enmity continues until Christ’s return, which is established in Isaiah 11:12-13 and Ezekiel 37:19-23. I prefer to agree with God's word, not make up my own narrative.

Again, the division of the nation into two kingdoms was temporary. The nation was always called to be a single nation. Israel's sin caused the division, and it was due to worthless shepherds or kings.

The example of the 30 pieces of silver was used as a prophecy, by inference, to a completely different situation at the time of Christ, when Judas betrayed him. It was meant to indicate that the true Shepherd, Christ, would be reject by the people, just as they rejected Zechariah as a Prophet.

In other words, this was not a prophecy of the future, but a prophetic *allusion* to a future Messianic event. In practical terms, Zechariah was saying that the nation had been reduced to a single nation, since the northern Kingdom had been judged as unworthy and idolatrous.

Your critique that, “Ephraim's fulfillment in the NT era is not as a tribe, but as being mixed in with all the Jewish People,” does not stand against someone who truly meditates on the word day and night.

That just sounds silly. We're discussing it. Not trying to prove who is better than another!

Again, show us where preterists promote what I do!

I don't know why you bring up "the preterists" and apparently don't want to answer my question as to why you bring them up?

You can’t because what I promote exposes the folly of replacement theology. The church did not replace Israel; the church is the means by which God redeems the elect descendants of both houses of Israel while sown in the world in this age, especially the elect descendants of Ephraim.

At this point I don't even know if you know what Replacement Theology is? Some who preach the succession of the International Church, effectively "replacing" Israel, deny they are RT proponents.

And I do believe I stated my goals at the onset: to relate the differences between non-dispensational futurism and dispensational futurism, and why neither can be justified by the Bible. In showing those differences and their deficiencies historicism is confirmed as the only eschatological model that avoids such pitfalls.

What do you believe is to be biblically fulfilled in the future? What isn't going to be fulfilled in the future?

 

[Jerryhuerta]

This is a fallback position without any rational basis for saying it. If so, you might try looking elsewhere, as I did.



Not at all. I explained this to you, from my perspective. The tribes are important only insofar as they represent the fulfillment of *all Israel.* Tribal distinctions are unimportant. What's important is that they all equally share in the inheritance. So the numbers are, I think, symbolic. And we know that because the idea is traced back to Eze 40-48 where Ezekiel had a vision of a temple that was purely symbolic. It has and will not ever be built.



Again, the division of the nation into two kingdoms was temporary. The nation was always called to be a single nation. Israel's sin caused the division, and it was due to worthless shepherds or kings.

The example of the 30 pieces of silver was used as a prophecy, by inference, to a completely different situation at the time of Christ, when Judas betrayed him. It was meant to indicate that the true Shepherd, Christ, would be reject by the people, just as they rejected Zechariah as a Prophet.

In other words, this was not a prophecy of the future, but a prophetic *allusion* to a future Messianic event. In practical terms, Zechariah was saying that the nation had been reduced to a single nation, since the northern Kingdom had been judged as unworthy and idolatrous.



That just sounds silly. We're discussing it. Not trying to prove who is better than another!



I don't know why you bring up "the preterists" and apparently don't want to answer my question as to why you bring them up?



At this point I don't even know if you know what Replacement Theology is? Some who preach the succession of the International Church, effectively "replacing" Israel, deny they are RT proponents.



What do you believe is to be biblically fulfilled in the future? What isn't going to be fulfilled in the future?

The debate about the tribes was whether they were distinguishable, not their importance. Can you stay on point? They are distinguishable to God according to Revelation 7; Zechariah 13:7, 10:7-9; Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23, and Matthew 13:24-30.

As to Zechariah 11:13, the text supports an ordained enmity created by God between the descendants of Judah and Ephraim by the events of the first advent, the betrayal of Christ. The judgment of the Northern kingdom was hundreds of years prior to Zechariah, yet the ordained enmity is the future. You’re making things up.

I bring up preterists because they are unabashed RT proponents. And you won’t find them promoting that “Christ came to punish the shepherds and scatter the sheep” because it uproots RT.

The sine qua non of RT is “the church replaced Israel.” The corollary to that is, they treat the tribes of Revelation 7 as “spiritual” or figurative and not literal Israel. Now one has to concede to literal if they claim not to hold to RT.

I hold the tribes in Revelation 7 are literal, not figurative, and ultimately distinguishable.

What do you say?

 

[keras]

At this point I don't even know if you know what Replacement Theology is? Some who preach the succession of the International Church, effectively "replacing" Israel, deny they are RT proponents.

Any organization, other than small groups of faithful Christian people, is not a succession of Israel.
The individual faithful Christian believers are the only people of God. They were people scattered around the world from the 1st Century and remain so today.

I hold the tribes in Revelation 7 are literal, not figurative, and ultimately distinguishable

So do I, and we are told that God knows who and where they all are. Amos 9:9
My belief is that when we go to live in the holy Land, we will be divided into 12 groups, named as per the list in Revelation 7:5-8 Proved by the Prophesies in Ezekiel 40 to 48

 

[RandyPNW]

The debate about the tribes was whether they were distinguishable, not their importance. Can you stay on point?

I was on point--you just reject it. The 12 tribes are in fact undistinguishable, which is what I said. You're saying something ludicrous, that even though they are undistinguishable to us, they are not to God. If they are not distinguishable to us, there is no sense in distinguishing them at all!

They are distinguishable to God according to Revelation 7; Zechariah 13:7, 10:7-9; Jeremiah 31:1-2, 27-28; Ezekiel 34:2, 9-10, 23-26; Isaiah 49:5-7, Hosea 2:14-23, and Matthew 13:24-30.

No passages of Scripture show that they remain distinct tribes in the NT era. None.

OT Scriptures may refer to them as having an inheritance in Israel in the NT era, specifically in the Millennium. But none of them declare the distinctions of 12 tribes remain unless they are expressed in symbolic fashion, which is what Eze 40-48 and the 144,000 do.

So am I on point? Most definitely. You just disagree.

As to Zechariah 11:13, the text supports an ordained enmity created by God between the descendants of Judah and Ephraim by the events of the first advent, the betrayal of Christ. The judgment of the Northern kingdom was hundreds of years prior to Zechariah, yet the ordained enmity is the future. You’re making things up.

No, I'm just making sense of it. I understand Zechariah was after the captivities. But he is here explaining the disappearance of the division into two kingdoms. And this is time appropriate for Zechariah to mention, since he represented the kind of national restoration that the Jews were to look forward to.

What they were to look forward to was not more worthless kings who would divide Israel into two kingdoms. Instead, they would look forward to Christ, the Good Shepherd, who would suffer a blow, just as the prophets suffered rejection.

It was not an immediate promise of deliverance, but a note to expect things to get worse before they get better. But the division of the nation into two kingdoms would end by the judgment of all those who didn't participate in the return to Jerusalem.

I bring up preterists because they are unabashed RT proponents. And you won’t find them promoting that “Christ came to punish the shepherds and scatter the sheep” because it uproots RT.

The sine qua non of RT is “the church replaced Israel.” The corollary to that is, they treat the tribes of Revelation 7 as “spiritual” or figurative and not literal Israel. Now one has to concede to literal if they claim not to hold to RT.

Preterists are not the Big Party holding to RT. The much bigger party are the Amillennialists. "Spiritual interpretation," or "allegorical interpretation," was made popular by Origen and by groups of non-Christians before him. I wouldn't say that Origen's allegorical system was non-Christian, but I do think he went too far when applying it to the Millennium, as well as to "Israel."

I hold the tribes in Revelation 7 are literal, not figurative, and ultimately distinguishable.

What do you say?

I believe in Israel's literal salvation as a nation at the return of Christ. It will begin as a political deliverance from military aggressors, and end with spiritual salvation, which will initiate their ultimate destiny and deliverance from oppressors.

I believe the 12 tribes of Rev 7 are symbolic because they reflect back upon Ezekiel's vision in chs. 40-48. There, the vision is given of a temple which has never been built.
It was given specifically to shame the people of his own time who by their sins had lost their temple.

The symbolism of the temple indicates a future temple will come to be. And I believe that temple is Christ and the Church. I therefore believe Ezekiel's temple is symbolic.

And I believe the 144,000 are symbolic representation of the fulfillment of promises originally made to all 12 tribes, which are now the Jewish People. They are given equal numbers to symbolize the fact the Jewish People are one, and all share the inheritance equally.

But there are no tribes of Israel today, nor will there be ever again. They don't even exist in God's mind except that God never has forgotten the promise He made to all 12 tribes, that they would all belong to a single nation, a single God, and a single hope. Rev 7 and 14 show that fulfillment in the Jewish People by describing them as a remnant.

 

[RandyPNW]

Any organization, other than small groups of faithful Christian people, is not a succession of Israel.

I'm not sure what difference you're making between a big organization and a small organization?

The individual faithful Christian believers are the only people of God. They were people scattered around the world from the 1st Century and remain so today.

The Catholics lay claim to a lineage from the beginning, as well. How is your lineage superior to theirs?

So do I, and we are told that God knows who and where they all are. Amos 9:9
My belief is that when we go to live in the holy Land, we will be divided into 12 groups, named as per the list in Revelation 7:5-8 Proved by the Prophesies in Ezekiel 40 to 48

Yea, I believe Eze 40-48 and Rev 7 and 14 are symbolic representations of the Millennial Kingdom with the Church being the new temple. Some of the Church Fathers believed as you do that we're all going to Jerusalem. However, I think we are simply going to Christ. Indeed, after the Millennium I think we will all end up in New Jerusalem.

 

[Jerryhuerta]

I was on point--you just reject it. The 12 tribes are in fact undistinguishable, which is what I said. You're saying something ludicrous, that even though they are undistinguishable to us, they are not to God. If they are not distinguishable to us, there is no sense in distinguishing them at all!



No passages of Scripture show that they remain distinct tribes in the NT era. None.

OT Scriptures may refer to them as having an inheritance in Israel in the NT era, specifically in the Millennium. But none of them declare the distinctions of 12 tribes remain unless they are expressed in symbolic fashion, which is what Eze 40-48 and the 144,000 do.

So am I on point? Most definitely. You just disagree.



No, I'm just making sense of it. I understand Zechariah was after the captivities. But he is here explaining the disappearance of the division into two kingdoms. And this is time appropriate for Zechariah to mention, since he represented the kind of national restoration that the Jews were to look forward to.

What they were to look forward to was not more worthless kings who would divide Israel into two kingdoms. Instead, they would look forward to Christ, the Good Shepherd, who would suffer a blow, just as the prophets suffered rejection.

It was not an immediate promise of deliverance, but a note to expect things to get worse before they get better. But the division of the nation into two kingdoms would end by the judgment of all those who didn't participate in the return to Jerusalem.



Preterists are not the Big Party holding to RT. The much bigger party are the Amillennialists. "Spiritual interpretation," or "allegorical interpretation," was made popular by Origen and by groups of non-Christians before him. I wouldn't say that Origen's allegorical system was non-Christian, but I do think he went too far when applying it to the Millennium, as well as to "Israel."



I believe in Israel's literal salvation as a nation at the return of Christ. It will begin as a political deliverance from military aggressors, and end with spiritual salvation, which will initiate their ultimate destiny and deliverance from oppressors.

I believe the 12 tribes of Rev 7 are symbolic because they reflect back upon Ezekiel's vision in chs. 40-48. There, the vision is given of a temple which has never been built.
It was given specifically to shame the people of his own time who by their sins had lost their temple.

The symbolism of the temple indicates a future temple will come to be. And I believe that temple is Christ and the Church. I therefore believe Ezekiel's temple is symbolic.

And I believe the 144,000 are symbolic representation of the fulfillment of promises originally made to all 12 tribes, which are now the Jewish People. They are given equal numbers to symbolize the fact the Jewish People are one, and all share the inheritance equally.

But there are no tribes of Israel today, nor will there be ever again. They don't even exist in God's mind except that God never has forgotten the promise He made to all 12 tribes, that they would all belong to a single nation, a single God, and a single hope. Rev 7 and 14 show that fulfillment in the Jewish People by describing them as a remnant.

Now that we've returned to the issue of distinguishability and moved away from your straying-off point, are you in denial that God is omniscient and we are not? Really!

Of course, God knows who are the literal descendants of the sons of Jacob and where they are today; God knows the end from the beginning; he knows us in the womb. Any denial that God knows who are the literal descendants of the sons of Jacob is a denial of His omniscience, period. Moreover, God has Hosea affirm that the ten northern tribes will be indistinguishable to us: “Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people” (Hosea 7:8). The Psalms also affirms it.

They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. (Psalms 83:3-4)​

The parable of the Hidden Treasure in Matthew 13:44 is rooted in the scriptures about how God hides his people Israel from you and me but knows exactly who and where they are.

Furthermore, His prophets affirm that God ordains a heightening of the division between the descendants of Judah and Ephriam commencing with the first advent (Zechariah 11:14) and lasting until the second advent in Isaiah 11:12-13 and Ezekiel 37:19-23.

Again, Zechariah 11:14 supports an enhancement of the division between Judah and Ephraim, not its “disappearance” as you assert. As I stated, you’re making things up about Zechariah 11:14.

And the NT also affirms that God has his angels seal the members of certain tribes in Revelation 7, establishing a real distinction between the tribes in the last days.

Your spiritualized or figurative take on Revelation 7 is RT, no doubt. So, it’s you who is the RT proponent here, not I.

 

[keras]

I'm not sure what difference you're making between a big organization and a small organization?

The true Church are currently many small organizations, still scattered around the world.

The Catholics lay claim to a lineage from the beginning, as well. How is your lineage superior to theirs?

The Roman Church started as, and was a Satanic organization. Many members are faithful Christians now.

Yea, I believe Eze 40-48 and Rev 7 and 14 are symbolic representations of the Millennial Kingdom with the Church being the new temple

Eze 40-48 and Rev 7 both describe God's people BEFORE Jesus Returns. As I have proved before by how God's faithful Christian people are present in the holy Land during the end times; Daniel 7:25 and Revelation 13:7, conquered by the Anti-Christ, as described in Zechariah 14:1-2.

Your denial of a new Temple, ignores many Prophesies.

 

[RandyPNW]

Now that we've returned to the issue of distinguishability and moved away from your straying-off point, are you in denial that God is omniscient and we are not? Really!

I neither deny that I've strayed off the point nor that I denied God's omniscience. You are diverting from the argument by bringing up accusations, which are completely unnecessary. Why don't *you* stay on point? Why waste this time with unnecessary commentary and accusation? If you accuse me, I have to defend myself.

Of course, God knows who are the literal descendants of the sons of Jacob and where they are today; God knows the end from the beginning; he knows us in the womb.

Are you kidding me? I told you there are no 12 tribal distinctions of Israel today!! How then should God not know this? How on earth can God be accused of not knowing who they are when they don't even exist! Talk about complete absurdity!

You are assuming these 12 distinct tribes exist when you can't find a single one of them, and can only claim, without evidence, that they are "in the mind of God!" If you can't even prove they exist how can you prove they exist in the mind of God?

Any denial that God knows who are the literal descendants of the sons of Jacob is a denial of His omniscience, period. Moreover, God has Hosea affirm that the ten northern tribes will be indistinguishable to us: “Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people” (Hosea 7:8). The Psalms also affirms it.

They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. (Psalms 83:3-4)​

The parable of the Hidden Treasure in Matthew 13:44 is rooted in the scriptures about how God hides his people Israel from you and me but knows exactly who and where they are.

How silly! It says no such thing! That's an incredible stretch of logic. If God made them undistinguishable to us then they are not considered distinguishable to Him either. He in fact is the One who made them no longer to be distinguished.

Your argument is like this. "God made it so that He hid from us the fact the earth is round. He knows the earth is round, but He deliberately made us think the earth is flat and appear to be so. So God knows the earth is round, but made us to think it is flat."

Furthermore, His prophets affirm that God ordains a heightening of the division between the descendants of Judah and Ephriam commencing with the first advent (Zechariah 11:14) and lasting until the second advent in Isaiah 11:12-13 and Ezekiel 37:19-23.

You cite references without showing them to prove what you claim.

There is a likely interpretation that would be more true to current reality, in which Ephraim no longer exists. The Prophet could be saying that Ephraim, in *his time,* would be happy to see the day when Israel is a single nation, in her final restoration. The Jews who survived in captivity and reconstituted as the "Jewish People" would one day be regathered into Israel as a single nation--not that the tribes would continue to exist until that time. The same with Eze 37.

Again, Zechariah 11:14 supports an enhancement of the division between Judah and Ephraim, not its “disappearance” as you assert.

No, see above. And I already answered that earlier.

"I understand Zechariah was after the captivities. But he is here explaining the disappearance of the division into two kingdoms. And this is time appropriate for Zechariah to mention, since he represented the kind of national restoration that the Jews were to look forward to.

What they were to look forward to was not more worthless kings who would divide Israel into two kingdoms. Instead, they would look forward to Christ, the Good Shepherd, who would suffer a blow, just as the prophets suffered rejection.

It was not an immediate promise of deliverance, but a note to expect things to get worse before they get better. But the division of the nation into two kingdoms would end by the judgment of all those who didn't participate in the return to Jerusalem."

Again, the tribal distinctions faded as the nation evolved and appeared as kingdoms. That was God's original intention--not tribes, but tribal evolution into a nation.

The tribes disappeared when the Davidic Kingdom emerged and when the Kingdom divided in two. And their full obliteration took place when they went into captivity and returned as a single nation, becoming "the Jewish People."

The Prophets told Israel in ancient times that this would happen. The tribal divisions would end with the restoration of Israel, following failure. That happened easily by the time of Christ, even if the people still made reference to their genealogies. The Levitical tribe remained important until the Law passed.