.
Brit-Am Now no. 1390
The Lost Ten Tribes of Israel Movement
21 September 2009, 3 Tishrei 5770
Contents:
1. More Defenders of an Ephraim Nation and a Company of Nations. Brit-Am Replies
Yet Again.
(a) Sandie
B: The Special Addition
(b) Charlotte Mecklenburg: Both Ideas are Right but Joseph is Especially
Suitable
(c) Nathan Proud: A Nation and a Company of Nations are part of the Birthright
and Joseph Received the Birthright!
2. What is the Difference Between Brit-Am Beliefs and those of Anglo-Israel-ism?
3. Brit-Am and the New Testament
4. Murray Allatt:
A Nation and a Company of Nations as seen from Australia
5. Tessa
from New Zealand Supports Brit-Am!
1. More Defenders of an Ephraim Nation
and a Company of Nations. Brit-Am Replies Yet Again.
================================================
(a)
Sandie
B: The Special Addition
RE: Brit-Am Now no. 1389
Yair - i agree with Steve also. But did note, which i would assume as scholarly
types, you and Steve would have also noticed: there are different Hebrew words
used but translated as the same word in the texts. Became much clearer when i
used the Hebrew as i studied both texts. The pattern i noticed was that chpt 48
is talking more about numbers filling the earth. Israel recalls the blessing
given him by Abba in chapter 35, it is in regards to a "kahal" of nations. And
then (chapter 48) he talks of the nation and multitude of nations being their
blessing and he also passes his name on to the boys, via their father Joseph,
and gives the blessings they will have.
So, what did Israel pass on to the sons of Joseph in his blessing? This was
different than what is said for all the sons in chapter 49, as Steve points out.
We easily see the influence and leadership Ephraim and Manashe have displayed in
the world. I would see that as part of the blessing, and responsibility they
were given.
In peace sandie b.
================================================
(b) Charlotte
Mecklenburg: Both Ideas are Right but Joseph is Especially Suitable
Re: Brit-Am Now no. 1389
Regarding the Nation and a Company of Nations.
It looks like both ideas are right. In Chapter 35 it can be anticipating the
nations that will come through Jacob as well as the nations that will come
through Joseph. After all is not Joseph from Jacob. Any nation or nations that
come from the 12 no matter who or what they are, are from Jacob and of course
Israel specifically is the singular nation where as the nations plural is all of
those that have come from all 12 tribes. The prophecy that Jacob gives
specifically to Joseph is easily interpreted the way Steven Collins has done it.
The make up of God's peoples is far more complex than we can unravel at this
time.
But isn't it fun to look and think about the Word of God.
Charlotte Mecklenburg char@gmail.com
================================================
(c) Nathan Proud:
A Nation and a Company of Nations are part of the Birthright and Joseph Received
the Birthright!
Subject: Brit-Am #1389
Yair, you say that Genesis 48:4 is directed to Joseph. That isn't right. Jacob
is speaking to Joseph, telling him what God had told him (Jacob). I don't see it
as fair to apply the nation of Genesis 35 to Judah since he had nothing to do
with the birthright. That birthright was first given through Abraham in Genesis
17 when his name was changed from Abram, for he would become the father of many
nations. Isaac of course was the only recipient of that birthright, and Jacob
both bought and stole everything that could have been potentially Esau's by
birthright. The birthright belonged exclusively to Joseph (I Chronicles 5:2),
which is only in part that nation and multitude of nations promised specifically
in Genesis 35 to Jacob. There is obviously more to it. In a nutshell, no
patriarch other than Joseph was promised a nation, although some of them
obviously have received their own nations, some even several from a certain
point of view (e.g. Dan having several, Judah, Benjamin, Reuben, etc. having one
each). So even though Joseph is told Manasseh would become a great people and
Ephraim a fullness of nations, not having the specific wording of Genesis 35,
the nation and company of nations cannot possibly apply to anyone else. Judah
therefore is not the single nation and the ten tribes are not the company of
nations. From Judah came the leader (I Chronicles 5:2), so he is the recipient
of the Davidic dynasty, but the birthright belonged to Joseph alone. The other
tribes of Israel are blessed with the blessings of Abraham, very specifically
with the blessings of Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 33.
Nathan Proud
================================================
================================================
================================================
Brit-Am
Replies:
In order to reply we need to summarize in our own terms the
arguments of (a) Sandie B, (b) Charlotte Mecklenburg, and (c) Nathan Proud.
(a) The Special Addition
Sandie B says:
Genesis 35 speaks to Jacob of a Nation and a Company of Nations.
This may be considered something extra, special, in addition to what he had
already been promised as inheritor of his forefathers.
Genesis 48 gives something special and extra to Joseph with an expression that
may be interpreted to mean a nation and multitude of nations.
Genesis 49 has Jacob bless all the Tribes with Joseph amongst them. The Tribes
here receive the Promises that Jacob had received from his forefathers.
It follows that the something special given to Joseph in Genesis 48 must have
been the Nation and a Company of Nations Jacob received in Genesis 35.
(b) Both Ideas are Right but Joseph is
Especially Suitable
Charlotte Mecklenburg says:
It is true that Genesis 35 (a Nation and a Company of Nations) is given to Jacob
(not Joseph alone) but Joseph is from Jacob and Joseph is a singular nation also
referred to as a Company of Nations.
(c) A Nation and a Company of Nations
are part of the Birthright and Joseph Received the Birthright!
Nathan Proud says:
In Genesis 35 a Nation and a Company of Nations was promised to Jacob who passed
the Birthright onto Joseph therefore
a Nation and a Company of Nations applies to Joseph especially since Joseph is
expressly promised (in Genesis 48) a Nation (Manasseh)
and a fullness of nations (Ephraim). Even though a fullness of nations may not
be the same wording as a Company of Nations it is close enough
under the circumstances to be considered the same.
Regarding Joseph inheriting the Birthright we have traced and acknowledged this
in our article:
Geneaology of the Blessings to Israel
http://www.britam.org/GeneaologyofBlessings.html
Genesis 35 speaks to Jacob of a Nation and a Company of Nations.
It does not speak to Joseph.
The something special that Jacob gave to Joseph in Genesis 48 may be summarized
by he having both his sons recognized as
tribes in their own right the double portion of the firstborn.
In addition Jacob said:
"The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my
progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills: they shall be on the
head of JOSEPH, and on the crown of him that was separated from his brethren"
(Genesis 49:6).
In other words more of the same (that was received from the father and that also
be given to the brothers) but multiplied many times over.
The interpretation of Malo HaGoyim as Multitude of Nations in my opinion DOES
NOT fit the Hebrew.
Anyone who says otherwise should bring parallels from scripture were such an
expression is used in that way.
They are not there!
What does Genesis 48 say:
[Genesis 48:2] AND ONE TOLD JACOB, AND SAID, BEHOLD, THY SON JOSEPH COMETH UNTO
THEE: AND ISRAEL STRENGTHENED HIMSELF, AND SAT UPON THE BED.
[Genesis 48:3] AND JACOB SAID UNTO JOSEPH, GOD ALMIGHTY APPEARED UNTO ME AT LUZ
IN THE LAND OF CANAAN, AND BLESSED ME,
[Genesis 48:4] AND SAID UNTO ME, BEHOLD, I WILL MAKE THEE FRUITFUL, AND MULTIPLY
THEE, AND I WILL MAKE OF THEE
A Company of Peoples; AND WILL GIVE THIS LAND TO THY SEED AFTER THEE FOR AN
EVERLASTING POSSESSION.
Here Jacob recalls the Almighty appearing to him at Luz. This is the same as
Beth-el (Genesis 28:19) and Beth-el is where the Promises of Gensis 35 were
given!
[This apparently could strengthen the case of those that say that the blessing
of Genesis 35 were to go to Joseph in Genesis 48].
In Genesis 48:4 above we have replaced the expression A MULTITUDE OF PEOPLE (of
the KJV) with A Company of Peoples since the Hebrew says
Kahal Amim and parallels A Company of Nations (Kahal Goyim) in Genesis 35:11.
In Genesis 35:11 a Nation and a Company of Nations is promised and in Genesis
48:4 the blessing opens up with a parallel to Company of Nations only!
Jacob (Genesis 48) promised Joseph that:
He would be a Company of Nations.
His two sons would be recognized each as separate tribes in their own right and
the other sons of Joseph would be included within them.
The blessing of his forefathers would be multiplied many times over and given to
Joseph.
Manasseh would also be a nation but Ephraim have all nations of the earth being
in need of him and he would rule over them.
Despite everything there is not enough in Genesis 48 to attribute Nation and a
Company of Nations of Gensis 35 to Joseph.
There is enough to attribute to him only the Company of Nations section.
To Sandie b. (a) we would reply that we agree that something special and extra
is promised to Joseph in Genesis and that it could be associated with the
blessing of Genesis 35 (a Nation and a Company of Nations) but only to part of
it i.e. the Company of Nations part.
We identify Joseph mainly with the English-speaking nations i.e. Britain,
Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the USA with possibly offshoots in Ireland
and South Africa and elsewhere. These peoples are widely recognized as one
cultural and ethnic unity sharing common history, culture, and values and
usually in the international sphere working together or at least in such a way
as they complement each other. The other Israelite Nations that we recognize
include Switzerland, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Iceland, Denmark, Norway,
Sweden, Finland.
These nations in effect are emulators of Joseph in so far as they share similar
values and culture and in some way or other act similarly to the way Joseph
does. Joseph is their leader. In Biblical Terms the term Joseph is also applied
to them. They are the companions of Joseph in Ezekiel 37.
Judah on the other hand THROUGHOUT THE BIBLE is separate from Joseph.
Judah has its own task.
The future re-union is between Judah (Ezekiel 37) and Joseph.
It is not between Joseph and his brothers.
Joseph is already assumed to be leading his brothers and they are spoken of as
attached to him.
[Isaiah 11:12] HE WILL RAISE AN ENSIGN
FOR THE NATIONS, AND WILL ASSEMBLE THE OUTCASTS OF ISRAEL, AND GATHER THE
DISPERSED OF JUDAH FROM THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH.
[Isaiah 11:13] THE JEALOUSY OF EPHRAIM SHALL DEPART, AND THOSE WHO HARASS JUDAH
SHALL BE CUT OFF; EPHRAIM SHALL NOT BE JEALOUS OF JUDAH, AND JUDAH SHALL NOT
HARASS EPHRAIM.
[Ezekiel 37:16] MOREOVER, THOU SON OF
MAN, TAKE THEE ONE STICK, AND WRITE UPON IT, FOR JUDAH, AND FOR THE CHILDREN OF
ISRAEL HIS COMPANIONS: THEN TAKE ANOTHER STICK, AND WRITE UPON IT, FOR JOSEPH,
THE STICK OF EPHRAIM AND FOR ALL THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL HIS COMPANIONS:
[Ezekiel 37:17] AND JOIN THEM ONE TO ANOTHER INTO ONE STICK; AND THEY SHALL
BECOME ONE IN THINE
HAND.
[Ezekiel 37:22] AND I WILL MAKE THEM ONE
NATION IN THE LAND UPON THE MOUNTAINS OF ISRAEL; AND ONE KING SHALL BE KING TO
THEM ALL: AND THEY SHALL BE NO MORE TWO NATIONS, NEITHER SHALL THEY BE DIVIDED
INTO TWO KINGDOMS ANY MORE AT ALL.
The only two distinctions are between Judah and Joseph.
The term in Genesis 35 (a Nation and a Company of Nations) fits Judah and
Joseph.
This is an answer to Charlotte (b).
At the very beginning of the blessing to Joseph in Gnesis 48 he is defined as A
Company of Peoples (Hebrew: Kahal Amim)
paralleling A Company of Nations (Kahal Goyim) in Genesis 35:11.
Manasseh is defined as a nation that is in effect a part of this Company of
Nations.
The term a Nation and a Company of Nations is not applied to Joseph.
This is an answer to Nathan (c).
###################################################
2. What is the Difference Between
Brit-Am Beliefs and those of Anglo-Israel-ism?
From: Kerry Bulls
RE: Brit-Am Now no. 1389
#4. A Short Introduction to Yair Davidiy and Brit-Am
http://britam.org/now/1389Now.html#A
Dear Yair,
G-d bless you for your service to Israel in the IDF. I am curious as to what
you see the difference being between the doctrine of Anglo-Israel-ism and what
Brit-Am believes?
I always find your writing very fascinating as I envy your knowledge of Jewish
affairs and the Old Covenant scriptures. Thank you for your time.
Chaplain Kerry Lance Bulls
================================================
================================================
================================================
Brit-Am
Reply:
(a)
IDF
Service:
I mentioned my IDF Service since it was important for me and people find
it interesting.
I served for 18 months regular service and after that annual service (of about a
month each year) for most years over a ca. 20 year period.
At various times I served in Sinai, Samaria, and Lebanon and ended my service
with the rank of sergeant.
My most active and latest service was as an Infantrymen attached to the Armoured
(Tank) Corps.
For peoples in my age group who came to Israel when I did there is
nothing unusual about this.
================================================
(b) Differences Between Brit-Am Beliefs
and those of Anglo-Israel-ism.
By Anglo-Israel-ism you mean British Israel type beliefs.
The Brit-Am Ten Tribes Movement puts more emphasis on the Hebrew Bible and
Historical Researches
directly concerned with the issue as to whom the Lost Ten Tribes today are.
All other considerations we relate back to this issue and see everything from
its perspective.
We attempt to avoid being side-tracked.
We work towards a greater understanding between Judah and Joseph and their
future re-union.
We support the State of Israel.
We work to enhance Biblical Consciousness.
We emphasize more the aspect of Judah and come from a more Judah-involved
perspective.
Nevertheless we realize the importance of encouraging Ephraimites to relate more
to their specific ethnicity
and Tribal allocations.
###################################################
3. Brit-Am and the New Testament
From: Pastor James PS Templeton <jamestempleton123@btinternet.com>
Subject: Using your articles
Organization: Emerald Isle Ministries
Dear Yair, I am pleased to use your articles which I always post to my group. I
wondered whether you would consider making use of the New Testament as well as
it also supports identity. This is just a thought as in the Brit-Am Now no. 1389
you mentioned Herbert W. Armstrong?s influence and this would have included the
New Testament. I feel that your influence would be greatly increased if there
was a Christian element. Perhaps you would consider prophesies fulfilled by the
[Christian] Messiah. I know you have written about two Messiahs which is
interesting but only one can be the true Messiah. You strongly support
Christianity as a good influence to Israelites so may have no objection to my
suggestions. I will continue to post your articles. I am retired but continue to
support the Identity cause. Yours Very Sincerely, Jim Templeton
Pastor James Templeton,
Flat 1, Lawnfield Court,
Donard Park,
Newcastle,
County Down,
Northern Ireland.
BT33 0SE
================================================
================================================
Brit-Am
Reply:
Our use of the term Messiah or "Messiahs" for future leaders of
Judah and Joseph need not contradict belief in a Messiah who will resolve all
religious issues one way or the other.
It is a matter of terminology that we borrowed from elsewhere.
We attempt not to relate to the New Testament since this is not our field and
not part of our message.
Supporting
"Christianity as a good influence to Israelites" is not the same as agreeing
with it.
We see Christianity as a tool of Divine Providence through which the Lost Ten
Tribes will be enabled to return.
This understanding of ours is consistent with Biblical and Jewish Sources by
which Yair Davidiy personally attempts to conduct himself
and that Brit-Am is obligated not to go against.
###################################################
4. Murray
Allatt:
A Nation and a Company of Nations as seen from Australia
Note: We received the letter below after we received the three letters in
item #1 above
and after we had written replies to them.
From: Murray Allatt <murray139@ozemail.com.au>
Re: Brit-Am Now no. 1389
http://britam.org/now/1389Now.html#Steven
#1. Steven Collins defends an Ephraimite
NATION AND A COMPANY OF NATIONS. Brit-Am Reply
Hello Yair,
With respect to this question of "nation and company of nations" discussion.
True Genesis 35:11 pertains to Jacob ( whose name was changed to Israel).
It is obvious that Jacob's offspring (all 12 tribes) have grown into nations (or
peoples). As you say, "Judah", the Jews, take in not only Judah but Benjamin and
a good part of Levi. So on it's face when we look at what happened to the tribes
of Israel each of the tribes has grown into a nation in it's own right. Not
surprising. That is what tribes of all ethnicities have done.
But going to your comment on Gen. 35: 11, you say,
"A NATION AND A COMPANY OF NATIONS in Genesis 35:11 is a promise
given to Jacob i.e. to all Israel".
It is a prophetic promise that has great significance in the fulfillment of
God?s promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Israel).
What you have not dealt with (nor has Steven Collins) is Gen. 48:16.
"The Angel that redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads (Ephraim and
Manasseh); and LET MY NAME (ISRAEL) BE NAMED ON THEM, and the name of my fathers
Abraham and Isaac; and let them (Ephraim and Manasseh) grow into a multitude in
the midst of the earth." That has prophetic significance. Many, many prophecies
pertaining to Israel in fact pertain largely to Ephraim and Manasseh (and to the
other ?lost? tribes of Israel only to lesser extent). Then there are separate
prophecies for Judah.
In any event, it seems from then on, the blessings of Jacob (Israel) were to be
largely the blessings of Ephraim and Manasseh (now collectively having the name
of Jacob (Israel) named on them, including that of becoming a nation and a
company of nations of prophetic significance so far as the national blessings
bestowed upon Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Israel). As you comment, Gen. 35:11 is a
promise given to Jacob (whose name was changed to Israel) and who passed his
name, (and I would maintain the major blessings he had been given, of which Gen
35:11 was plainly major) to the two "lads" upon whom he named his name -
Israel., as well as the names (and blessings) of Abraham and Isaac.
That the other tribes received a blessing each and would also be "nations" is
plainly set out in Gen.49. But only Ephraim and Manasseh would become a company
of nations and a great single nation. You realize that all of these blessings
pertain to prophecy and in particular the fulfillment of God's promises to
Abraham ,Isaac and Jacob (Israel). Only the nations of Ephraim, Britain and her
confederate countries (Australia, New Zealand and Canada, and perhaps South
Africa before rule change) fulfilled that.
I note that Strong (H4390) also allows that "multitude" in Gen. 48:19 can mean
"handful" and that Strong's No. H1471 ' allows "nations" as well as "people" (in
the sense of nation). See below.
mel-o', mel-o', mel-o'
From H4390 ; fulness (literally or figuratively):? X all along, X all that is
(there-) in, fill, (X that whereof . . . was) full, fulness, [hand-] full,
multitude.
H1471
go'ee, go'-ee
Apparently from the same root as H1465 (in the sense of massing); a foreign
nation; hence a Gentile; also (figuratively) a troop of animals, or a flight of
locusts: Gentile, heathen, nation, people.
I would be interested in your take on the fact Israel (Jacob) named his name on
"on the lads". It does seem significant.
Obviously this is a little rushed but I think there is something else needs to
be explored and explained.
Regards
Murray Allatt
================================================
================================================
Brit-Am
Reply:
Murray points to Ephraim and Manasseh being called after the name of Jacob and
his forefathers.
Genesis 48:15] AND HE BLESSED JOSEPH, AND SAID, GOD, BEFORE WHOM MY FATHERS
ABRAHAM AND ISAAC DID WALK, THE GOD WHICH FED ME ALL MY LIFE LONG UNTO THIS DAY,
[Genesis 48:16] THE ANGEL WHICH REDEEMED ME FROM ALL EVIL, BLESS THE LADS; AND
LET MY NAME BE NAMED ON THEM, AND THE NAME OF MY FATHERS ABRAHAM AND ISAAC; AND
LET THEM GROW INTO A MULTITUDE IN THE MIDST OF THE EARTH.
Murray takes this as implying that the main blessing to Jacob (Israel) should
devolve on Ephraim and Manasseh.
This blessing should (implied Murray) include becoming "A NATION AND A COMPANY
OF NATIONS" (Genesis 35:11).
We have interpreted the blessing to have the "names" called on them in both a
literal and literate sense.
In a literal sense we have shown how names derived from Hebrew (after Abraham
the Hebrew), Isaac, and Jacob
were indeed historically and at present applied to groups we identify as
descended from Joseph.
Celtic Iberi and the Hebrews
http://www.britam.org/Proof/Attributes/roleHebrew.html
In a literate sense we agree with Murray that calling the name of the fathers on
the children means having aspects of the fathers being much more pronounced in
the children than might otherwise be the case.
Nevertheless this still does not detract from our reasoning in item#1 above as
to why
"A NATION AND A COMPANY OF NATIONS" (Genesis 35:11) applied to Judah and Joseph
and not to Manasseh and Ephraim alone.
Joseph is A COMPANY OF NATIONS, i.e.
A COMPANY OF NATIONS encompasses Manasseh and Ephraim together and by Biblical
historical implication
all the rest of the Lost Ten Tribes as well.
Murray also pointed to interpretations of the Hebrew words goi (nation, people)
and malo meaning fullness.
These meanings are important because of the expression "malo haGoyim" or
literally "fullness of the peoples" in Genesis 48:16
where the KJV translates the term as A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS.
[Genesis 48:19] AND HIS FATHER REFUSED, AND SAID, I KNOW IT, MY SON, I KNOW IT:
HE ALSO SHALL BECOME A PEOPLE, AND HE ALSO SHALL BE GREAT: BUT TRULY HIS YOUNGER
BROTHER SHALL BE GREATER THAN HE, AND HIS SEED SHALL BECOME A MULTITUDE OF
NATIONS.
We went to the Iben Shushan "Concordantsia Chadasha" (New Concordance) and
looked Malo up.
There were hundreds of entries.
The root of the word is MLA.
Iben
Shushan
classifies the entries for this word under different headings:
a. Full all the space.
b. Fill up till no room is left.
c. Complete, finish.
d. Encompass everything there.
e. Confirm, establish, enable.
f. Complement.
g. Filled up.
h. Gather together.
Matityahu
Clark (Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew based on the Commentaries of
Samson Rafael Hirsch) gives the following meanings:
being full; fulfilling duties; having full value; satisfying; equipping;
conferring authority; having everything; gathering; produce-filled field;
etc.
We see that the word "malo" may have different meanings dependent on the
context.
We have given it our own interpretation in accordance with our understanding of
the Hebrew and consistent with the Classical Commentatories.
http://britam.org/Genesis/Gen47to50VaYechi.html
"HIS SEED SHALL BECOME A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS" (Genesis 48:19): In Hebrew "malo
hagoim" or literally the fullness of nations.
Onkelos translates this as saying that his seed will rule over the nations.
Iben Ezra says it means that many peoples will emerge from him.
Brit-Am understands the expression to mean that other nations will be dependent
upon him for their very existence
or derive their existence from him.
###################################################
5.
Tessa
from New Zealand Supports Brit-Am!
================================================
Re: Brit-Am Now no. 1389
Shalom Yair
I have just read Brit Am Now 1389 and wanted to clarify your references to me in
it. I have copied below what I had sent to you a few days ago.
You will see that I do not share Steven Collins' understanding - rather I agree
with your view except that Genesis 48:4 is Jacob's recollection of the promise
to him and not directed to Joseph as you have indicated.. Basically I think
Genesis 48:4 and 48:19 indicates two sets of 'a nation and a company of nations'
not just one. I can see why Steven has come to his understanding but think it
requires too much interpretation to be considered as applying to Joseph only.
Why would the Almighty tell Jacob in Genesis 35 (before he had any children) the
fate of only one of them?
As I thought, the whole matter is easy to get tangled up in but hope it is now
clear that I subscribed to your position.
Blessings - Tessa
================================================
Re Brit-Am Now 1387: A NATION AND A
COMPANY OF NATIONS
Genesis 35:11 is a promise that Jacob will give rise to 'a nation and a
company of nations' which would appear to be Judah (Northern Kingdom) and
Ephraim (Southern Kingdom) respectively. Genesis 48:4 also clearly refers to
the progeny of Jacob not Joseph. Jacob is relating to Joseph the words
spoken by the Almighty to him (Jacob). Jacob would become a 'company of
peoples' - all 12 tribes (plus Ephraim and Manasseh).
Then Genesis 48:5 begins the prophecy for Joseph (not his brothers). Verse
19 shows that Manasseh will become 'a nation' and Ephraim 'a multitude of
nations'.
While there appears to be a repeat of the original blessing in 35:11,
similar terminology confuses the situation and these are two separate
prophecies in my opinion.
Prophecy 1: Jacob will become a nation
(Judah/2 tribes) and a company of
nations (10 tribes) - the stick of Judah and the stick of Ephraim as Ezekiel
describes it.
Prophecy 2: Joseph will become a nation (Manasseh) and a company of nations
(Ephraim) - together they are the stick of Ephraim with the other 8 tribes
as above.
Therefore Prophecy 2 is only about Joseph and is a subset of Prophecy 1.
Whilst it is relatively easy to identify Judah's stick today, we simply
don't know exactly who belongs in the
stick of Ephraim. It's probably an
exaggeration to suggest that the USA is Manasseh although he may well be
found hidden within the nation of the USA. Similarly, Ephraim may well be
found hidden within the British Commonwealth nations but not all BC subjects
are Ephraimites.
The stick of Ephraim is still not in clear view as the
stick of Judah is. When the stick of Ephraim is visible, it will embody 'the
nation' Manasseh, the 'company of nations' Ephraim plus the 8 other tribes
who are not part of Judah's stick.
Hope that hasn't muddied the waters even further!
Blessings - Tessa
================================================
================================================
Brit-Am
Reply:
Tessa supports Brit-Am!
The reasoning of Tessa is similar to our own.
Genesis 35 is general and applies to all Israel and here we have the blessing
A NATION AND A COMPANY OF NATIONS.
Genesis 48 is specific and deals with an aspect of Genesis 35 and here Joseph is
expressly referred to
as a A COMPANY OF NATIONS!
Tessa took the KJV as it is written
"HIS SEED SHALL BECOME A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS" (Genesis 48:19).
Tessa took A MULTITUDE OF NATIONS as meaning just that and still came tot he
same conclusion as Brit-Am.
We however re-interpreted this expression making it less pertinent to our
overall considerations.
We apologize to Tessa for having lost her previous e-mail and attributing to her
an opinion she did not hold.
##################################################
[Amos 3:6] SHALL A TRUMPET [Hebrew: "Shofar"]
BE BLOWN IN THE CITY, AND THE PEOPLE NOT BE AFRAID? SHALL THERE BE EVIL IN A
CITY, AND THE LORD HATH NOT DONE IT?
[Amos 3:7] SURELY THE LORD GOD WILL DO NOTHING, BUT HE
REVEALETH
HIS SECRET UNTO HIS SERVANTS THE PROPHETS.
[Amos 3:8] THE LION HATH ROARED, WHO WILL NOT FEAR? THE LORD GOD HATH SPOKEN,
WHO CAN BUT PROPHESY?
Pleased with what you read?
The Brit-Am enterprise is a Biblical work.
God willing, they who assist Brit-Am will be blessed.
Brit-Am depends on contributions alongside purchases of our publications
Click Here to make an offering.
Click Here to view our publications.
|
'It is impossible to rightly govern the
world without
God or the Bible.'
George Washington
Brit-Am is the "still small voice" that contains the truth.
[1-Kings 19:12] AND AFTER THE EARTHQUAKE A FIRE; BUT THE LORD WAS NOT IN THE
FIRE: AND AFTER THE FIRE A STILL SMALL VOICE.
Home
