Identity Chrisis: Slander

[pat34lee]

I agree with most of what you've said here. A covenant was made with a household. This household is the House of Israel (Jacob). Those wanting to enter into the same covenant are requesting to be "adopted" or "grafted" into this household. This household consists of 12 separate groups of people, most are assimilated to the nations they were scattered to, though some groups of people within these nations carry an oral tradition (and some ritual tradition) that they came out of Israel (even if specific tribal identity has been lost). The root supports the branches, so those adopted in have to depend on the root to sustain their existence. It is my opinion this has nothing to do with conversion, but rather acceptance of a people who have a willingness to take on the yoke of the covenant. Part of being adopted is taking on the family name, part of being grafted in is taking the name of the tree.

What is absolutely needed is a Restorer of Truth, one who will teach the pure form of Torah, so that the House of Israel and all those adopted in can become "echad", united to become one in mind and soul.

True. I can live knowing that others have honest disagreements with me on some things. I could even be wrong on some. :o

What I don't like is the slandering of others like calling two house believers anti-Semitic or promoting replacement theology when they state plainly that they are not.

 

[Qnts2]

You are not part of the scattered (diaspora) though. Very few of the diaspora returned to become part of the Jews. Most are still among the nations living as gentiles.

Such garbage. Any child of Israel/Jew who is not living in the land of Israel, is in the diaspora. And being in the diaspora means living in a gentile land.

 

[visionary]

That is in the last few minutes of the Q&A. You don't have to be anything. People from other nations have been able to join with Israel from the beginning. "One law for you and the sojourner," etc. Now that we can be saved without joining them first (circumcision, etc.), it's even easier.

I am a believer in the One Law, but even in that it doesn't make me any less a Gentile with quite a few nationalities in there except from the tribes of Israel, so being a believer in the One True Holy One of Israel doesn't make me any more an Israeli or Jew. I am however a part of the commonwealth of Israel, by faith.

 

[macher]

I am a believer in the One Law, but even in that it doesn't make me any less a Gentile, nor any more and Israeli or Jew. I am however a part of the commonwealth of Israel, by faith.

There you go, nice explanation.

 

[Qnts2]

True. I can live knowing that others have honest disagreements with me on some things. I could even be wrong on some. :o

What I don't like is the slandering of others like calling two house believers anti-Semitic or promoting replacement theology when they state plainly that they are not.

Some Two House believers are anti-semitic, and Two House borrowed from British Israelism/Christian Identity which is anti-semitic.

Two House might deny believing replacement theology. John Hagee denies being Dual Covenant, but while denying it, his doctrine is definitely Dual Covenant. So, Two House might deny the label, but the theology they teach is very simply Replacement Theology.

All tribes of Israel are Jewish, but Two House denies who the Jewish people are. Instead, Two House claims that Gentiles who believe on Yeshua are actually (to differing extents), the '10 tribes'. So, Two House, in order to justify that statement, has to classify the Jewish people as not all of the tribes, so they can replace 10 of the tribes. Replacement theology is essentially identity theft. Two House steals the identity of many of the Jewish people (10 of the 12 tribes). And the reasoning is not that much different then other groups which adhere to replacement theology, to take God promises given to the Jewish people, and claim them for themselves.

 

[visionary]

Some Two House believers are anti-semitic, and Two House borrowed from British Israelism/Christian Identity which is anti-semitic.

Two House might deny believing replacement theology. John Hagee denies being Dual Covenant, but while denying it, his doctrine is definitely Dual Covenant. So, Two House might deny the label, but the theology they teach is very simply Replacement Theology.

All tribes of Israel are Jewish, but Two House denies who the Jewish people are. Instead, Two House claims that Gentiles who believe on Yeshua are actually (to differing extents), the '10 tribes'. So, Two House, in order to justify that statement, has to classify the Jewish people as not all of the tribes, so they can replace 10 of the tribes. Replacement theology is essentially identity theft. Two House steals the identity of many of the Jewish people (10 of the 12 tribes). And the reasoning is not that much different then other groups which adhere to replacement theology, to take God promises given to the Jewish people, and claim them for themselves.

The worse part of this type of claiming is the distortions. The Jewish people have their place in God's landscape of prophetic duties that no other tribe or nation of people can perform. It is up to us to be blessed in blessing them and supporting them in this task. We are to believe He is and He knowing the end from the beginning, has set apart a people to represent Him, in all His Glory, crowing Him as their King, and doing what they are required at the appointed time. Not saying that we, Gentiles from all nations, will not have a part, just a different one, and yet obedient to Him who is our King. God wants all people in His kingdom. He calls us all, but let us not covet that which is assigned to another nation.

 

[Qnts2]

I see that someone removed the other thread with Jim Staley's teaching on it. The slandering of two house teachers I saw on it must stop because it is contemptible to continue to attack fellow believers based on lies. I listened to the whole teaching and found it very informative. How much did you listen to before falsely labeling him as a replacement theologist, QNTS?


He has a few answers to questions starting about 1:10. The second Q&A directly answers accusations of replacement theology.

Two House teaching is not a part of Messianic Judaism, and Messianic Judaism has written official papers opposing Two House teaching.

Therefore, Two House teaching should not be promoted on a Messianic Judaism forum.

You put a teaching up which is counter to the beliefs of Messianic Judaism. When I state what it is, you personally attack me.


From a paper on the MJAA site,

MJAA: The Ephraimite Error: A Short Summary

The Ephraimite Error: A Short Summary
Friday, July 6, 2007
By: Kay Silberling, Ph.D.
The Ephraimite Error - A movement alternately known as the "Ephraimite," "Restoration of Israel," "Two-Covenant Israel," or "Two House" movement has recently gained ground in some areas among ardent Christian Zionists....
A Short Summary of (Click here to get full paper as PDF - 284kb [Requires Adobe® Reader®])
"The Ephraimite Error"
A Position Paper Submitted to the
International Messianic Jewish Alliance
Committee Members and Advisors:
Kay Silberling, Ph.D.
Daniel Juster, Th.D.
David Sedaca, M.A.


Parallels to Anglo-Israelism and Racial Theory
Where have these ideas of Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's come from? The sources they give are few. Koniuchowsky cites Yair Davidy as a major source, but attributes to him few specific citations.18 Neither he nor Wootten make any mention of theirs or Davidy's dependence on another probable source, the writings produced during and after the eighteenth century movement called Anglo-Israelism or British-Israelism. And it is for good reason that these sources are not mentioned, as they are popular among some American anti-Semitic groups for their pro-white, racial claims to being Israel. Wootten and Koniuchowsky make the same pro-white, racial claims.
I will list several parallels that are striking in their agreement. Both groups (Anglo-Israelites and Ephraimites) build their theories on the mythic story of the ten "lost tribes" of the northern kingdom. Both groups put great store by suspect and contrived etymologies of English words based on Hebrew. Both groups claim pre-eminent, "first-born" status as purported heirs of Ephraim. Both share an innate hostility toward Roman Catholicism and Judaism. Both proclaim that the teaching they propound is a "mystery" revealed only through their teachers. Both argue that the lost tribes migrated to areas where they eventually became known as Saxons. Both groups make mention of the nobility of anglo-Saxons as evidence for their biblical, Israelite heritage.
White Supremacy
Of most concern about the Anglo-Israelite and the "Two House" theory is the racial element found in both. Both focus primarily on the anglo-Saxon "race." Wootten uses other racial terms such as "blood-line Israelites." She is concerned about "dilut[ing] the bloodlines."19 She refers to Jews today as "biological Jews."20
Yet God's relationship with Israel is not racial. The social-historical people of Israel have never claimed racial priority as the basis for their covenant relationship to God. Jewish identity is based, not on racial deliberations but on a shared communal memory and on choice.
The same exegesis, the same contrived etymologies, the same constructed histories, the same white, Anglo-Saxon racial focus, the same arguments against the church and the Jews - the parallels are unmistakable and undeniable. Wootten and Koniuchowsky have built their "Two Houses" on the shifting sand of Anglo-Israelite theology. The concerns that this raises for Jews, whether Messianic, rabbinic, or secular, and for non-Jewish Christians are evident.
Anti-Jewish Elements in the "Two House" Theology
Certainly Wootten and Koniuchowsky are not overt Jew-haters. But their words often echo and have the same effect as those of people who hate Jews.21 Thus despite the fact that Koniuchowsky claims to be Jewish (we have not verified this), and despite his vigorous protests, there is indeed a great deal of anti-Jewish rhetoric in his and Wootten's claims. Following what has become a typical motif among Christian critics of Jews, Wootten accuses Messianic Jews of "feelings of superiority," of believing they are "'Twice Chosen,'" and of having a "false racial pride."22 The motif of the "blind Jews," a long-standing, standard motif of Christian anti-Jewish rhetoric, is there also.23 Wootten states, "They cannot hear. They cannot see. Until the Lord lifts the veil…"24 She scolds Jews, demanding that they "must accept" her own viewpoint.25 Wootten and Koniuchowsky demand to set the vision for Messianic Jews today. Wootten argues that it is only when Jews follow her teaching that they will be obedient to God, "for only then," she promises, "will you be what the Father called you to be…"26
With an irony that Koniuchowsky seems to be unaware of, he refers to his solution for the problem of Jewish and Christian relations as "the biblical final solution."27 We do not need another "final solution." The Jewish people barely survived the last one. In this, Wootten and Koniuchowsky, in their grand claims to have solved the issue of racial pride, merely replaced an old racial argument with a new one. For them, race and "bloodline" is the determining factor.
Dangers of the Movement
Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's words elicit the gravest concern in the images they construct for the future. For along with their claims to be physical Israel, they expect someday to wield territorial control over 10/12th of the ancient tribal boundaries of Israel. They create an "enemy" that includes Jews now living in regions once occupied by the ancient tribal groups, which, they contend, now belong to the Ephraimites. For the Palestinians they expect total eradication.28 In the pages of both Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's writings lies a strong assumption, sometimes stated implicitly, sometimes explicitly, that the land belongs to them (along with the Jewish people, whose portion, they contend, should be limited to 2/12ths of Israel's territory). For the "Two House" proponents, the land of Israel is "their land."29
Here again, the acorn has not fallen far from the tree. Traditionally, Anglo-Israelite thinking has also included an expectation that the land would be theirs as physical Israel.30 It evokes for us memories of the Crusaders of the 11th through 13th centuries, who also, based on the claim to be heirs of Israel, sought to take their "rightful place" as dwellers of the land through conquest and warfare.
Conclusion
The position of the I.M.J.A. is that the Ephraimite, or "Two House" movement is in error for the following reasons:

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

 

[visionary]

Two House teaching is not a part of Messianic Judaism, and Messianic Judaism has written official papers opposing Two House teaching.

Therefore, Two House teaching should not be promoted on a Messianic Judaism forum.

You put a teaching up which is counter to the beliefs of Messianic Judaism. When I state what it is, you personally attack me.


From a paper on the MJAA site,

MJAA: The Ephraimite Error: A Short Summary

The Ephraimite Error: A Short Summary
Friday, July 6, 2007
By: Kay Silberling, Ph.D.
The Ephraimite Error - A movement alternately known as the "Ephraimite," "Restoration of Israel," "Two-Covenant Israel," or "Two House" movement has recently gained ground in some areas among ardent Christian Zionists....
A Short Summary of (Click here to get full paper as PDF - 284kb [Requires Adobe® Reader®])
"The Ephraimite Error"
A Position Paper Submitted to the
International Messianic Jewish Alliance
Committee Members and Advisors:
Kay Silberling, Ph.D.
Daniel Juster, Th.D.
David Sedaca, M.A.


Parallels to Anglo-Israelism and Racial Theory
Where have these ideas of Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's come from? The sources they give are few. Koniuchowsky cites Yair Davidy as a major source, but attributes to him few specific citations.18 Neither he nor Wootten make any mention of theirs or Davidy's dependence on another probable source, the writings produced during and after the eighteenth century movement called Anglo-Israelism or British-Israelism. And it is for good reason that these sources are not mentioned, as they are popular among some American anti-Semitic groups for their pro-white, racial claims to being Israel. Wootten and Koniuchowsky make the same pro-white, racial claims.
I will list several parallels that are striking in their agreement. Both groups (Anglo-Israelites and Ephraimites) build their theories on the mythic story of the ten "lost tribes" of the northern kingdom. Both groups put great store by suspect and contrived etymologies of English words based on Hebrew. Both groups claim pre-eminent, "first-born" status as purported heirs of Ephraim. Both share an innate hostility toward Roman Catholicism and Judaism. Both proclaim that the teaching they propound is a "mystery" revealed only through their teachers. Both argue that the lost tribes migrated to areas where they eventually became known as Saxons. Both groups make mention of the nobility of anglo-Saxons as evidence for their biblical, Israelite heritage.
White Supremacy
Of most concern about the Anglo-Israelite and the "Two House" theory is the racial element found in both. Both focus primarily on the anglo-Saxon "race." Wootten uses other racial terms such as "blood-line Israelites." She is concerned about "dilut[ing] the bloodlines."19 She refers to Jews today as "biological Jews."20
Yet God's relationship with Israel is not racial. The social-historical people of Israel have never claimed racial priority as the basis for their covenant relationship to God. Jewish identity is based, not on racial deliberations but on a shared communal memory and on choice.
The same exegesis, the same contrived etymologies, the same constructed histories, the same white, Anglo-Saxon racial focus, the same arguments against the church and the Jews - the parallels are unmistakable and undeniable. Wootten and Koniuchowsky have built their "Two Houses" on the shifting sand of Anglo-Israelite theology. The concerns that this raises for Jews, whether Messianic, rabbinic, or secular, and for non-Jewish Christians are evident.
Anti-Jewish Elements in the "Two House" Theology
Certainly Wootten and Koniuchowsky are not overt Jew-haters. But their words often echo and have the same effect as those of people who hate Jews.21 Thus despite the fact that Koniuchowsky claims to be Jewish (we have not verified this), and despite his vigorous protests, there is indeed a great deal of anti-Jewish rhetoric in his and Wootten's claims. Following what has become a typical motif among Christian critics of Jews, Wootten accuses Messianic Jews of "feelings of superiority," of believing they are "'Twice Chosen,'" and of having a "false racial pride."22 The motif of the "blind Jews," a long-standing, standard motif of Christian anti-Jewish rhetoric, is there also.23 Wootten states, "They cannot hear. They cannot see. Until the Lord lifts the veil…"24 She scolds Jews, demanding that they "must accept" her own viewpoint.25 Wootten and Koniuchowsky demand to set the vision for Messianic Jews today. Wootten argues that it is only when Jews follow her teaching that they will be obedient to God, "for only then," she promises, "will you be what the Father called you to be…"26
With an irony that Koniuchowsky seems to be unaware of, he refers to his solution for the problem of Jewish and Christian relations as "the biblical final solution."27 We do not need another "final solution." The Jewish people barely survived the last one. In this, Wootten and Koniuchowsky, in their grand claims to have solved the issue of racial pride, merely replaced an old racial argument with a new one. For them, race and "bloodline" is the determining factor.
Dangers of the Movement
Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's words elicit the gravest concern in the images they construct for the future. For along with their claims to be physical Israel, they expect someday to wield territorial control over 10/12th of the ancient tribal boundaries of Israel. They create an "enemy" that includes Jews now living in regions once occupied by the ancient tribal groups, which, they contend, now belong to the Ephraimites. For the Palestinians they expect total eradication.28 In the pages of both Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's writings lies a strong assumption, sometimes stated implicitly, sometimes explicitly, that the land belongs to them (along with the Jewish people, whose portion, they contend, should be limited to 2/12ths of Israel's territory). For the "Two House" proponents, the land of Israel is "their land."29
Here again, the acorn has not fallen far from the tree. Traditionally, Anglo-Israelite thinking has also included an expectation that the land would be theirs as physical Israel.30 It evokes for us memories of the Crusaders of the 11th through 13th centuries, who also, based on the claim to be heirs of Israel, sought to take their "rightful place" as dwellers of the land through conquest and warfare.
Conclusion
The position of the I.M.J.A. is that the Ephraimite, or "Two House" movement is in error for the following reasons:

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

Amen ... Israel is a real place. It's in a country called Israel. The capital is Jerusalem. It is from Jerusalem that all the nations of the earth will learn the ways of God through His Messiah. That is why Paul called the OT "living" oracles, and the Jews keepers. They have been appointed the task of teaching us to be like them in obedience to His Word. Once they acknowledge their King, the lights will come on, and that house will be on fire with His Glory, here in the last days. They are the first and will be the last, and as promised the blindness in part is only until the time of the Gentiles is over. We, here in Messianic Judaism, have been studying the "living" oracles with many willing knowledgeable Jewish Rabbi teachers and have been enriched by the experience of coming to understand Hebraic thought and the context of Scripture. It has opened up many parts of scripture that had made Paul hard to understand and seemingly out of step with OT before but now makes sense.

 

[pat34lee]

Such garbage. Any child of Israel/Jew who is not living in the land of Israel, is in the diaspora. And being in the diaspora means living in a gentile land.

And I was beginning to think I was overly harsh with you the other day. You missed the 'as a gentile'. And there is a difference between choosing to live outside Israel and being in the diaspora. It may be a hardship for some to go, but for the diaspora, it was and is impossible.

 

[visionary]

And I was beginning to think I was overly harsh with you the other day. You missed the 'as a gentile'. And there is a difference between choosing to live outside Israel and being in the diaspora. It may be a hardship for some to go, but for the diaspora, it was and is impossible.

living outside of Israel = diaspora

 

[pat34lee]

Some Two House believers are anti-semitic, and Two House borrowed from British Israelism/Christian Identity which is anti-semitic.

Two House might deny believing replacement theology. John Hagee denies being Dual Covenant, but while denying it, his doctrine is definitely Dual Covenant. So, Two House might deny the label, but the theology they teach is very simply Replacement Theology.

So, now two house are not only anti-Semites and teach replacement theology, they are outright liars about it?

All tribes of Israel are Jewish, but Two House denies who the Jewish people are. Instead, Two House claims that Gentiles who believe on Yeshua are actually (to differing extents), the '10 tribes'. So, Two House, in order to justify that statement, has to classify the Jewish people as not all of the tribes, so they can replace 10 of the tribes. Replacement theology is essentially identity theft. Two House steals the identity of many of the Jewish people (10 of the 12 tribes). And the reasoning is not that much different then other groups which adhere to replacement theology, to take God promises given to the Jewish people, and claim them for themselves.

Absolutely wrong. Never has been, never will be. That is what the Hasmoneans / Pharisees / rabbis have been working toward since the Hasmonean days, but they do not control all twelve tribes, and they will not. Why do you think the Ethiopian Jews were such a problem? They followed the older version of worship (not Judaism) that had no rabbis or oral tradition. Now they are forced to convert to Judaism or be ostracized.

And you're either not hearing or you're not listening or you're trying hard not to understand. Turn the defensive off and brain on.

NOBODY is talking about replacing tribes. Either we are part of them or not, it makes no difference for salvation. The tribes are out there. We don't have to be one of the tribes to claim the promises. We are grafted in.

 

[visionary]

So, now two house are not only anti-Semites and teach replacement theology, they are outright liars about it?

Absolutely wrong. Never has been, never will be. That is what the Hasmoneans / Pharisees / rabbis have been working toward since the Hasmonean days, but they do not control all twelve tribes, and they will not. Why do you think the Ethiopian Jews were such a problem? They followed the older version of worship (not Judaism) that had no rabbis or oral tradition. Now they are forced to convert to Judaism or be ostracized.

And you're either not hearing or you're not listening or you're trying hard not to understand. Turn the defensive off and brain on.

NOBODY is talking about replacing tribes. Either we are part of them or not, it makes no difference for salvation. The tribes are out there. We don't have to be one of the tribes to claim the promises. We are grafted in.

Jewish is not Judaism. Judaism is a faith. Jewish is a lifestyle. Jews are a bloodline.

 

[pat34lee]

living outside of Israel = diaspora

So, if I choose to move to Canada, I'm in diaspora from the US? I don't think so.

For most Jews today (in 2010, more Jews lived in the US than in Israel), living in or out of the land is their choice. Choosing to live elsewhere is not the same thing as not being allowed to return to Israel.

 

[visionary]

So, if I choose to move to Canada, I'm in diaspora from the US? I don't think so.

For most Jews today (in 2010, more Jews lived in the US than in Israel), living in or out of the land is their choice. Choosing to live elsewhere is not the same thing as not being allowed to return to Israel.

Land of Israel... anything outside of that is called diaspora [that means the rest of the world] which is not in the Promised Land.

 

[pat34lee]

Jewish is not Judaism. Judaism is a faith. Jewish is a lifestyle. Jews are a bloodline.

What does that have to do with the post?

 

[visionary]

What does that have to do with the post?

You are confusing the terms.. thus your conclusions are reflecting it.

 

[Qnts2]

Absolutely wrong. Never has been, never will be. That is what the Hasmoneans / Pharisees / rabbis have been working toward since the Hasmonean days, but they do not control all twelve tribes, and they will not. Why do you think the Ethiopian Jews were such a problem? They followed the older version of worship (not Judaism) that had no rabbis or oral tradition. Now they are forced to convert to Judaism or be ostracized.

Love this statement. 'The Jewish people do not controls all 12 tribes and they will not'. But the reality is, the Jewish people are all 12 tribes.

The Ethiopian Jews (Notice they are called Jews), were brought to Israel because they are Jewish. There is no forced conversion as they are already Jewish.

Israel again became a country on May 14, 1948. By 1955, the non-governmental Jewish Agency of Israel had already begun construction of schools and a teacher's seminary for the Beta Israel in Ethiopia. So Israel was a mere 7 years old, when Jewish people were already reaching out to the Ethiopian Jewish people, who lived under persecution in Ethiopia.

When Selassie was overthrown, a large number of Falasha were killed by the marxist dictator. In 1977, Menachim Begin, the Prime Minister of Israel, set forth on an effort to rescue the Ethiopian Jews and bring them to Israel. At first, Begin asked that the President of Ethiopia allow 200 Ethiopian Jews to leave for Israel. In the 1980's, when Ethiopia banned the practice of Judaism, and times became harder for the Beta Israel people. Between 1977 and 1984, 8000 Ethiopian Jews escaped Ethiopia to Israel. With multiple Israeli operations to help the Ethiopian Jews to move to Israel. In 1991, after the marxist dictator was overthrown, Israel saw an opening, so Yitzhak Shamir authorized a special permit for the Israeli airline, El Al, to fly on the Jewish Sabbath. On Friday, May 24, and continuing non-stop for 36 hours, a total of 34 El Al jumbo jets and Hercules C-130s—seats removed to accommodate the maximum number of Ethiopians—began a new chapter in the struggle for the freedom of Ethiopian Jewry. Why all of this effort? Because the Beta Israel/Falasha are recognized by Israel as Jews.

 

[sevengreenbeans]

Absolutely wrong. Never has been, never will be. That is what the Hasmoneans / Pharisees / rabbis have been working toward since the Hasmonean days, but they do not control all twelve tribes, and they will not. Why do you think the Ethiopian Jews were such a problem? They followed the older version of worship (not Judaism) that had no rabbis or oral tradition. Now they are forced to convert to Judaism or be ostracized.

And you're either not hearing or you're not listening or you're trying hard not to understand. Turn the defensive off and brain on.

NOBODY is talking about replacing tribes. Either we are part of them or not, it makes no difference for salvation. The tribes are out there. We don't have to be one of the tribes to claim the promises. We are grafted in.

Exactly right on every point.

Many people of the diaspora are forced to convert, one group among them - the Ethiopian sect. They are now known as Ethiopian Jews, due to conversion, but they called themselves Beta Israel - The House of Israel. There are many debates that go on among those descended from the 12 tribes, who keep their own ancient traditions alive, on whether to return to the Land of Israel at this time, because they are forced to accept Judaism and all its traditions and rabbinical teachings. They further lose their tribal identity (whether or not they know their tribe by name). They lose their own ancient traditions. Even among the Sephardic group, it has been a battle to preserve their identity. Those who do not admit this is an issue have not looked into it - and really should.

 

[yedida]

Two House teaching is not a part of Messianic Judaism, and Messianic Judaism has written official papers opposing Two House teaching.

Therefore, Two House teaching should not be promoted on a Messianic Judaism forum.

You put a teaching up which is counter to the beliefs of Messianic Judaism. When I state what it is, you personally attack me.


From a paper on the MJAA site,

MJAA: The Ephraimite Error: A Short Summary

The Ephraimite Error: A Short Summary
Friday, July 6, 2007
By: Kay Silberling, Ph.D.
The Ephraimite Error - A movement alternately known as the "Ephraimite," "Restoration of Israel," "Two-Covenant Israel," or "Two House" movement has recently gained ground in some areas among ardent Christian Zionists....
A Short Summary of (Click here to get full paper as PDF - 284kb [Requires Adobe® Reader®])
"The Ephraimite Error"
A Position Paper Submitted to the
International Messianic Jewish Alliance
Committee Members and Advisors:
Kay Silberling, Ph.D.
Daniel Juster, Th.D.
David Sedaca, M.A.


Parallels to Anglo-Israelism and Racial Theory
Where have these ideas of Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's come from? The sources they give are few. Koniuchowsky cites Yair Davidy as a major source, but attributes to him few specific citations.18 Neither he nor Wootten make any mention of theirs or Davidy's dependence on another probable source, the writings produced during and after the eighteenth century movement called Anglo-Israelism or British-Israelism. And it is for good reason that these sources are not mentioned, as they are popular among some American anti-Semitic groups for their pro-white, racial claims to being Israel. Wootten and Koniuchowsky make the same pro-white, racial claims.
I will list several parallels that are striking in their agreement. Both groups (Anglo-Israelites and Ephraimites) build their theories on the mythic story of the ten "lost tribes" of the northern kingdom. Both groups put great store by suspect and contrived etymologies of English words based on Hebrew. Both groups claim pre-eminent, "first-born" status as purported heirs of Ephraim. Both share an innate hostility toward Roman Catholicism and Judaism. Both proclaim that the teaching they propound is a "mystery" revealed only through their teachers. Both argue that the lost tribes migrated to areas where they eventually became known as Saxons. Both groups make mention of the nobility of anglo-Saxons as evidence for their biblical, Israelite heritage.
White Supremacy
Of most concern about the Anglo-Israelite and the "Two House" theory is the racial element found in both. Both focus primarily on the anglo-Saxon "race." Wootten uses other racial terms such as "blood-line Israelites." She is concerned about "dilut[ing] the bloodlines."19 She refers to Jews today as "biological Jews."20
Yet God's relationship with Israel is not racial. The social-historical people of Israel have never claimed racial priority as the basis for their covenant relationship to God. Jewish identity is based, not on racial deliberations but on a shared communal memory and on choice.
The same exegesis, the same contrived etymologies, the same constructed histories, the same white, Anglo-Saxon racial focus, the same arguments against the church and the Jews - the parallels are unmistakable and undeniable. Wootten and Koniuchowsky have built their "Two Houses" on the shifting sand of Anglo-Israelite theology. The concerns that this raises for Jews, whether Messianic, rabbinic, or secular, and for non-Jewish Christians are evident.
Anti-Jewish Elements in the "Two House" Theology
Certainly Wootten and Koniuchowsky are not overt Jew-haters. But their words often echo and have the same effect as those of people who hate Jews.21 Thus despite the fact that Koniuchowsky claims to be Jewish (we have not verified this), and despite his vigorous protests, there is indeed a great deal of anti-Jewish rhetoric in his and Wootten's claims. Following what has become a typical motif among Christian critics of Jews, Wootten accuses Messianic Jews of "feelings of superiority," of believing they are "'Twice Chosen,'" and of having a "false racial pride."22 The motif of the "blind Jews," a long-standing, standard motif of Christian anti-Jewish rhetoric, is there also.23 Wootten states, "They cannot hear. They cannot see. Until the Lord lifts the veil…"24 She scolds Jews, demanding that they "must accept" her own viewpoint.25 Wootten and Koniuchowsky demand to set the vision for Messianic Jews today. Wootten argues that it is only when Jews follow her teaching that they will be obedient to God, "for only then," she promises, "will you be what the Father called you to be…"26
With an irony that Koniuchowsky seems to be unaware of, he refers to his solution for the problem of Jewish and Christian relations as "the biblical final solution."27 We do not need another "final solution." The Jewish people barely survived the last one. In this, Wootten and Koniuchowsky, in their grand claims to have solved the issue of racial pride, merely replaced an old racial argument with a new one. For them, race and "bloodline" is the determining factor.
Dangers of the Movement
Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's words elicit the gravest concern in the images they construct for the future. For along with their claims to be physical Israel, they expect someday to wield territorial control over 10/12th of the ancient tribal boundaries of Israel. They create an "enemy" that includes Jews now living in regions once occupied by the ancient tribal groups, which, they contend, now belong to the Ephraimites. For the Palestinians they expect total eradication.28 In the pages of both Wootten's and Koniuchowsky's writings lies a strong assumption, sometimes stated implicitly, sometimes explicitly, that the land belongs to them (along with the Jewish people, whose portion, they contend, should be limited to 2/12ths of Israel's territory). For the "Two House" proponents, the land of Israel is "their land."29
Here again, the acorn has not fallen far from the tree. Traditionally, Anglo-Israelite thinking has also included an expectation that the land would be theirs as physical Israel.30 It evokes for us memories of the Crusaders of the 11th through 13th centuries, who also, based on the claim to be heirs of Israel, sought to take their "rightful place" as dwellers of the land through conquest and warfare.
Conclusion

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

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

I was reading an article on the net a week or so ago and came across that phrase "final solution" within the same context, getting Christians/Jews together. It was like David's stone hitting me between the eyes! I didn't fall over dead but I was soooo turned off (extremely angered too) that I immediately closed out of my browser so I now have no way of figuring out where I was. But I can tell you that it threw me for a loop that anyone who loves Yeshua and His people could say such a thing! I was dumbfounded and not in a good way. It's horrible that people are still thinking in such terms, even if they're not using them in the exact same way. Can't wrap my mind around it.

 

[Qnts2]

Exactly right on every point.

Many people of the diaspora are forced to convert, one group among them - the Ethiopian sect. They are now known as Ethiopian Jews, due to conversion, but they called themselves Beta Israel - The House of Israel. There are many debates that go on among those descended from the 12 tribes, who keep their own ancient traditions alive, on whether to return to the Land of Israel at this time, because they are forced to accept Judaism and all its traditions and rabbinical teachings. They further lose their tribal identity (whether or not they know their tribe by name). They lose their own ancient traditions. Even among the Sephardic group, it has been a battle to preserve their identity. Those who do not admit this is an issue have not looked into it - and really should.

I have Sephardic friends (and some who live in Israel). They have no battle like you describe. As people live together and inter-relate, somethings cross over the 'boundary'. Some of the Sephardic customs have remained Sephardic, and some have been accepted among other Jewish groups. And vice versa. The Sephardic have accepted other traditions.

I have a friend who is a Mountain Jew. And other Jewish friends from other locations. Again, no problem.

We are all one nation of people. Any of your so called battles are actually family fights, but those happen. Your desire to keep us separated is not really appreciated, as we are one people. As Jewish people, we have differing opinions, and somewhat differing traditions, foods, etc but have much in common also. And like any family, we can fight over things, but if you attack the family, we are very quickly in unity.