1. Steven Collins: The Abrahamic Covenant
From: Steve Collins <scollins@ll.net>
Subject: Re: "Brit-Am Now"-608

Shalom Yair,

Regarding the status of the separation of the house of Israel from God after the fall of the Kingdom of Israel, I offer some comments. Whatever the nature and condition of God's "divorce" from Israel, it is clear in the scriptures that God intended to not only rejoin Israel and Judah together in the future, but also to draw Israel back to God as well. Jeremiah 3 was noted in the Britam posting below in which God directs Jeremiah to send a conciliatory message to the house of Israel. This message was inspired by God approximately a century after the fall of Samaria. Jeremiah 51:5 cites another message given by God to Jeremiah about 125 years after the fall of Samaria. In this passage, God flatly states: "For Israel has not been forsaken, nor Judah of his God..."

How do we reconcile God's "divorcing" the ten tribes even as he also states he has "not forsaken" them? I believe each statement refers to a different covenant God has with the ten tribes. The "marriage" covenant that God made with Israel and Judah on Mt. Sinai was dependent on the obedience of Israel and Judah to Torah Law. There were very clear terms and conditions in this covenant about blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience (Deuteronomy 27-28). When God expelled the tribes from the Promised Land, it was similar to a husband's divorce of a wife and sending her away. However, there was an earlier covenant which was perpetually binding between God and the tribes of Israel. This was the covenant God made with Abraham, and which was passed down to Isaac, Jacob and eventually the sons of Jacob. Ephraim and Manasseh received the primary blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant in Genesis 48:8-20. As readers of Britam know, Ephraim and Manasseh were the leading tribes of the house of Israel. Unlike the "marriage" covenant made between God and the tribes of Israel at Mt. Sinai (which from the beginning included an "exit" clause for God if the tribes disobeyed), the Abrahamic Covenant was a perpetual covenant which was NOT dependent on the obedience of the future generations of the tribes of Israel.

Therefore, God's affirmations of his continued relationship with Israel in Jeremiah 3 and 51 even after the fall of Samaria and the expulsion of the tribes from the Promised Land makes sense when one sees this as God's faithfulness to his obligations to the covenant he made with Abraham's "birthright" progeny.

It seems apparent that the terms of the "marriage" covenant between God and the tribes of Israel are more binding when the tribes are living in the Promised Land which was a part of that covenant. For instance, when a portion of Judah returned to Judea under Ezra and Nehemiah, the scriptures confirm that Torah Law again governed their relationship with God. Ezekiel 37:15-28 prophesies that Israel and Judah will be reunited in the future and joined in a covenant relationship with God, but the ultimate fulfillment of that prophecy will occur in the Messianic Age when the resurrection of King David occurs (verses 24-25). Verse 26 shows that God will make an "everlasting covenant...of peace" with Israel and Judah at that time. Form that time forward, Israel and Judah will remain together in a covenant relationship with God.

Steve Collins

2. Francis: Jeremiah in Ulster?

For many years the 'lost tribe' analogy has been accepted, though partially concealed in Ulster. Examples of this are displayed on a regular basis by the Royal Black Institution who while on their cultural parades wear black sashes in mourning for Israel. The Orange Institution openly advance ancient covenant sentiments in their display of the fall of man. Of course propaganda by the enemies of Biblical truths have managed to turn these displays into the 'bigotry' that they require to advance the lies that maintain the denial of the Almighty's plan.

It now becoming more and more established in these parts, that Jeremiah landed on these shores on his westward track, bringing Jacob's piller stone, among other things with him.

Like in the state of Israel, and Ulster, we are denied the possibilities, let alone the truth.
The state of Israel fights against the so-called Palestinians for their very existence, so also does Ulster against the so-called Irish. Both them are in common league and hate and seek our destruction. Many of us here feel protected by the fact that the prophet Jeremiah, our forefather, was here, and here, at the present time, we stay.

3.

4. The Weekly Portion
See the Brit-Am commentary to the Beginning of Genesis at:
http://www.britam.org/Genesis/Gen1to6Breishit.html

5. Sweeney: Megalithic Monuments in Recent Ages?
The following source brings up some very good points.
We DISAGREE with much, possibly most, of what he says
but he does show convincingly enough that archaeological remains
often dated to the "Stone Age" actually originated in the Bronze and Iron Ages.
This is important for the Brit-Am understanding that the megalithic path of monuments
mentioned by Jeremiah 31 as a sign of Israelite origins did originate with
Israelites after these Israelites had been exiled and had migrated to the west.

http://www.consciousevolution.com/Rennes/arthurandstonehenge.htm
ARTHUR AND STONEHENGE: BRITAIN?S LOST HISTORY
Emmet Sweeney