Christianity and Brit-Am

Messianic Jews attack Brit-Am Message; Christianity may be seen as a tool of Divine Providence to bring the Lost Ten Tribes back to an ultimate reconciliation with Judah. Christians in non-Israelite nations are often antagonistic towards Judah. On the other hand Israelites from the Lost Ten Tribes are often led by Christianity to believe in the Bible, to feel an awareness of Hebraic belonging, and a closeness to Judah and the State of Israel; Ed Chumney is a supporter of Brit-Am.

 Brit-Am 
Replies to Queries

  Questions 
 and Answers 

Contents:
1. Reply to Messianic Jewish Objections.
2. Can Brit-Am be Reconciled with the New Testament?
3. What is the Attitude of the Mormon Church to Brit-Am?
4. Do you think that the present "Evangelical" and Fundamentalist regard for Israel indicates an arousal of "Joseph"?
5. "Brit-Am, The Jewish Aspect, and Eddie Chumney."
Brit-Am and Brit-Am type beliefs have been unjustly attacked by elements associated with the so-called "Messianic Jews". Are "Ephraimites" preferable?
6. In articles that Brit-Am replied to an unfavorable impression was given by others concerning the Messianic Israelite Alliance headed by Angus and Batya Wootten.
How does Brit-Am relate to this?
7. What is the attitude of Brit-Am to Christianity?

1. Question: What is your Reply to MJA Criticism?

The Messianic Jewish Alliance of America is posting, on many of their associated websites, a very strong and somewhat convincing argument against the "Two house" theory (Israel and Judah) and are strongly against any suggestion of the Ten Lost Tribes, especially Ephraim, as having anything to do with the West or the English speaking world see:
The Ephramite Error: A Short Summary
I, and I hope others, would like to hear your counter argument to their position - See also http://members.sti.net/racrabb6/html/twohouse.htm
...MJAA argument against the whole Lost Tribes idea needs to be addressed.
Sincerely,
Philos

Answer: Criticisms of Brit-Am are incorrect. Brit-Am beliefs are those of the Bible!

The article in question is:
'A Short Summary of "The Ephraimite Error". Submitted to the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations and the International Messianic Jewish Alliance'.

The arguments against the "Two House Theory" are directed against Brit-Am Ephraimite type beliefs but the sources addressed are primarily those of others.
Yair Davidiy is only mentioned in passing with criticisms being directed against the expressed views of known Messianic Ephraimites.
They are basically arguments by Christians against other Christians who happen to hold similar beliefs in some ways to those of Brit-Am and who to some degree may use Brit-Am sources. They do not represent Brit-Am and neither do they especially admit any great debt to us - though at least one of them uses our works and quotes from them, sometimes even acknowledging Brit-Am writings as the source.
These "Ephraimites" are also quoted in the article as holding views that Brit-Am would not agree with.
Even so, the article is presented as intending to counter Brit-Am Ephraimite type beliefs in addition to which it is worth clarifying our position on points that were raised.
In effect the article is more bluff than anything else.
They say the Biblical Promises to Israel were figurative or exaggerated. They do not deny that if taken literally the Promises support the Brit-Am position. The verses they quote as evidence upon examination also turn out to be consistent with Brit-Am understanding rather than with their own. They also claim that the Tribes had not been "lost" but had returned and re-united with Judah and are part of Judah. The Biblical evidence on this matter has already been discussed by us in our article:
"The Completeness of the Exile. Answers to Deniers of Brit-Am Biblical Truth".

Another piece of "evidence" they attempted to sneak in is a quotation from a Greek-language popular fairy tale known as "The Book of Tobias". To say that use of such "evidence" in the present context is a bit "irresponsible" is an understatement.
The rest of their argument consists of attempts to associate Brit-Am Ephraimite Two-House beliefs with potentially harmful ideas or with unsavory associations.
It is worth the while of Brit-Am to clarify the truth on the said points.

The article states:
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. Proponents of this movement contend that members of the "born-again" segment of the Christian church are, in fact, actual blood descendants of the ancient Israelites who were exiled in the Assyrian invasion of Israel in 722 B.C.E.

The article quotes (perhaps mistakenly) an alleged claim that all Gentiles are "Joseph" and that all the Promises pertain to Joseph.

We disagree with this.
The term "goi" in Scripture can mean either Israelite or Gentile.
This is also what the said article emphasizes:

"While the word goy (English: people, nation; Greek: ethnos) may refer to a Gentile nation, it may, just as easily, refer to the nation of Israel. The term is used to refer to Israel or the Jewish people in Exod 19:6; Deut 32:28, cf. 32:45; Josh 10:12-13; Isa 1:4; Isa 26:2; Jer 31:36; Zeph 2:9.4 Note especially Jer 31:36: "'If this fixed order departs from before me,' declares the LORD, 'Then the offspring [lit. "seed"] of Israel also shall cease from being a nation (goy) before me forever."
This is correct. See:
General: 1. What is a "Goi"?

Brit-Am does not say that all the Gentiles belong to "Joseph".
On the contrary.
See:
Joseph is only a minority amongst the Gentiles.

Joseph is also only a section of Israel and receives a good portion of the blessings but NOT all of them:
See our answers to
Questions on Joseph
1. Are all the Gentiles Joseph?
2. Will Joseph receive all the blessings?
3. How Did Joseph Receive the Blessings?
4. What Are Some Distinguishing Points About Judah and Joseph?
5. WHAT ARE THE DUTIES OF EPHRAIM?

The article claims that Promises to the Patriarchs such as that their seed would be like "the sand of the sea," "the dust of the earth," or the "stars of the sky" are hyperbole and not to be taken literally as indicating vast numbers of people on a world level.

Such an opinion is contrary to the simple straightforward meaning of the Bible.

Brit-Am has proven that the Prophecies were indicative of immense multitudes at a universal level of several hundred million.
This is the simple straightforward meaning of Scripture.
See:
Questions on the Literal Meaning of Prophecy:
1. Were Promises of becoming a great multitude literary hyperbole?

Questions on the Promises and Prophecy
1. HOW MANY ISRAELITES WILL THERE BE?
2. What Are Prototypical Prophecies?

The article claims that if the Ten Tribes were ever exiled then they returned with Ezra and today are to be found amongst the present-day Jews. They quote Scriptural verses to back their views.

We have analyzed these quotations and shown that they have been misunderstood.
In the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah only Israelites from the Tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi are mentioned, i.e. only former inhabitants of the Kingdom of Judah. All the other tribes were exiled, never returned apart from a small number, and lost knowledge of their Hebrew Origin.
Brit-Am proves that the Lost Ten Tribes are not today to be found amongst Judah apart from a representative minority.
See
"The Completeness of the Exile. Answers to Deniers of Brit-Am Biblical Truth"

See also
Questions on Judah
1. Are Israel and Judah Really Distinctly Different Entities?
2. Are the Jews Really Only Judah?

The article quotes from the Apocrypha work "The Book of Tobias" in which the term "Jews" is used as synonymous with Israelites exiled by Assyria. i.e.
In the Greek Tobit 11:17, in a clear reference to the Assyrian exiles, it states, "So on that day there was rejoicing among all the Jews who were in Nineveh." This designation became so widespread that by the time of the Hellenistic period, the term Jew identified those of all the former tribes who dwelt in the diaspora and who affirmed a particular religious system.

The Book of Tobias is a historical Greek text of a late date which adapts a popular fairy tale to an "Israelite Exile" setting. It is not evidence. The work has historical value (and we have used it in our researches, see "Ephraim") but it is not Scripture but rather the equivalent of popular literature. The Book of Tobias is part of the Apocrypha being popular Jewish tales in the Greek language whose sancitity is not recognized by Orthodox Jews nor by Protestant Christians. There exist different Greek versions of "Tobias" that may all derive from an Aramaic or Hebrew original. For all we know the original version may have said "Israelites" or "Hebrews" and it was translated as "Jews". Anyway, when dealing with the understanding of Scripture the question of what was said or not said in such works is if anything of only marginal relevance.

It is irresponsible to quote a text from such a source and attempt to use it against the express meaning of Scripture.

In popular parlance (both Jewish and Gentile) it is common to use the terms "Israelite", "Jew" and "Hebrew" as interchangeable nominations but one should not apply popular usage to Scriptural interpretation.
Just as "goi" in Scripture means literally "people" of Israelite or of non-Israelite origin and therefore cannot be interpreted as applying only to Gentiles despite its PRESENT-DAY usage so too a latter-day confusion between the appellation "Jew" and the Exiles of Assyria cannot be used as evidence of Scriptural intent.

See:
General: 1. What is a "Goi"?

In the same way as the authors of the article went to great lengths to emphasize the fact that the  term "goi" in the Bible is applied to both Israelites and Gentiles despite it much  later developing to mean only "Gentile"
so too
they should know that the term "Jew" only later became synonymous (in non-Biblical sources) with the term Israelite.

Brit-Am explains that the Bible uses the terms "Ephraim" and "Judah" to ALWAYS apply to distinctly separate entities.

See
Questions on Judah
2. Are the Jews Really Only Judah?

The article then tries to say that Brit-Am Ephraimite type beliefs are against Christianity.
The New Testament sometimes referred to people from other Israelite Tribes and uses expressions like "all Israel", etc.
Such expressions do not contradict Brit-Am beliefs but are consistent with   small representative minorities from the other tribes having attached themselves to "Judah", as we explain below in Question no.2 ("Can Brit-Am be Reconciled with the New Testament?") on this page.

The article criticizes "Ephraimites" for believing they descend from Israel based on emotional realization rather than hard evidence.

Brit-Am acknowlege  that this may be a problem but evidence does exist and with good will and faith much can yet be achieved. It also should be realized that in our time an instinctive recognition of Hebraic ancestry is being aroused from on High. Instinctive "gut" feelings however canot be relied upon in such matters since they may be misleading. Additional more concrete evidence is needed and it is this evidence that Brit-Am provides from Biblical, Biblically-related, historical, and scientific sources.

We discuss this question in an article at:
General: 2. How does one know for sure that one is descended from Israel?

The MJAA article attempts to brand Brit-Am Ephraimite beliefs as some type of racism or as receiving their inspiration from anti-semitic racist sources.
They claim to know of:
"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."

Brit-Am beliefs existed long before "British-Israel" which in its early productive period was actually pro-Jewish, if anything. When British-Israel" became tinged with anti-semitism it began to wither.
The organization Brit-Am was founded in order to present a Jewish cognizant and updated active approach to the subject.This had been preceded by intensive research on all aspects of the matter. At the beginning Yair Davidiy had developed an interest in "British-Israel" related literature but the decisive factor in deciding to undertake the necessary research was the evidence of the Bible and Rabbinical explanations of Biblical passages such as Commentary to the Biblical Book of Obadiah. Rabbi Avraham Feld recognized the Biblical and Rabbinical foundations and justification for Brit-Am studies and initially identified with the Brit-Am as well as writing Approbations for all published Brit-Am books.
Later due to personal issues Rabbi Feld became dissociated from Brit-Am though continuing to agree with it in principle.

Brit-Am is not a racist organization. Brit-Am insists on a conciliatory attitude of reconciliation between Joseph and Judah and on support for the State of Israel.
See our article on this subject at:
"Brit-Am versus British Israel!
British-Israelite Ideaology in the Light of Reality"
See also:
Brit-Am 1. Is Brit-Am another form of British-Israel?
2. Is Brit-Am a White Supremacist Movement?
see also
"Ephraimite Criteria. How Do You Know You Descend from Israel?"

The MJAA or (IMJAA?) article also raises the specter of  "Ephraimites" claiming they have more right to live in the Land of Israel than Judah.

Brit-Am teaches that Judah at the present time is the forerunner of the other tribes and that for Judah to control the Land at this stage is part of the Divine Plan as Prophesied in Scripture.

Who ever is against Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel and Jewish control of the Land of Israel is against the Bible and the God of the Bible.

See
The Land of Israel 1. Who Has a Right to Live in the Land of Israel?

The article against Brit-Am Ephraimite type beliefs reaches the following summation:

Conclusion
The position of the I.M.J.A. is that the Ephraimite, or "Two House" movement is in error for the following reasons:
flawed, unwarranted, and dangerous interpretation of scripture
inconsistent logic and contradictions
racist and race-based theology
theology that functions in the same way as supersessionism
historically inaccurate depictions of Israel
dangerous, false, and militant claims to the land which threaten the stability of the current State of Israel

In reply Brit-Am concludes:
The Brit-Am Ephraimite, or "Two House" movement is correct concerning Brit-Am Hebraic Identification since such is the evidence of Scripture and secular studies.
Denial of this fact indicates a deliberate avoidance of recognizing the literal implications of the Biblical message.
Our belief is logical and consistent. They who claim to believe in the Bible but disagree with us are more often than not illogical and contradictory which perhaps is understandable if one canot accept the Biblical message at its simple straight-forward literal level.
All Israelites are the Chosen People and there is no need to be ashamed about it. Everyone has their task in this world and being of Israelite descent imposes a greater responsibility to do right.
Brit-Am Biblical studies lead to a healing of the breach between Judah and Joseph and the fulfilment of Israelite Destiny as prophesied in the Bible.

2. Question: Can Brit-Am be Reconciled with the New Testament?

Answer: Members of Other Tribes Were Mainly Insignificant Minorities.
See what was intimated concerning members of other tribes in the Book of Ezra and the writings of Nachmanides. There were members of the other tribes (apart from Judah, Benjamin, and Levi) amongst the People of "Judah" but they were a minority. A historical Midrash ("Seder Olam") says that in the Second Temple Period eighty per cent of the "Jewish" people belonged to the Tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi. The remaining twenty per cent was comprised of minority representatives of all the other Tribes.

After the Assyrian Exile those remants of the Ten Tribes who remained or somehow or other returned comprised a small minority amonst "Judah". They were a minority of their tribal numbers and subservient to Judah. Their tribal expression in Biblical terms was to be achieved in the main body of their tribe who were in exile alongside the rest of the Ten Tribes. The majority portion of these tribes remained in exile and were to loose awareness of their identity.

A person addressing a body of Jews could refer to all the twelve tribes present since chances were that in a large group of "Jewish" people would be found some representatives of each tribe. Also such an address has symbolic value. On the other hand amongst the exiled Ten Lost Tribes were to be found representatives of Judah. Nevertheless the Bible on the whole distinguishes between the entities of "Judah" and "Joseph" and relates to the dominant element in each body.

3. Question: What is the Attitude of the Mormon Church to Brit-Am?

Answer: As far as we can tell their position is reservedly favorable. One of their members, Terry Blodgett, has written a very valuable linguistic work that supports Brit-Am conclusions.
A summary of the work by Terry Blodgett is to be found in our book "The Tribes".
See also "Brit-Am Now"-9 #4. Terry Blodgett: LDS people behind the Jewish nation of Israel
"Brit-Am Now"-158 #4. Claude Boisseau: Mormons
"Brit-Am Now"-651
#1. Mormon Interest and a Misunderstanding

4. Question: Do you think that the present "Evangelical" and Fundamentalist regard for Israel indicates an arousal of "Joseph"?

Answer: We are reaching the end-times when Joseph and Judah will re-unite. People who read and study the Bible are naturally more attuned to the Will of the Almighty. The present Christian support of Israel in the USA and elsewhere is proof of this. The same applies to the modern day phenomenon of Christians seeking to return to their "Hebraic Roots".

See also
"Brit-Am Now"-193 #6. Dr. Rafael Medoff: Why That Texas Town is Named "Palestine"
Brit-Am Now"-188 #2. Bill Rasmussen: True Christians pro-Jewish

"Brit-Am, The Jewish Aspect, and Eddie Chumney"

5. Question: Brit-Am and Brit-Am type beliefs have been unjustly attacked by elements associated with the so-called "Messianic Jews". Are "Ephraimites" preferable?

Answer: The "Ephraimite" movement is part of the positive forces of Israelite Redemption whereas the "MJ" activities are not.

Recently an article in the "Cleveland Jewish News" has been causing quite a stir:
"Ephraimites or Ephra I am nots?" by STEPHANIE GARBER Contributing Writer.

I do not really know why this article rather than others has drawn so much attention. Different forums have picked up on the article and started discussions about it, e.g. the religious Jewish site "Messiah Truth".

Anyway the "Cleveland Jewish News" article is of interest to Brit-Am since it touches on a few issues of importance to us. In addition to which the discussions around the article have begun dragging our name into it.
 
The article criticizes "Hebraic Roots adherents (also known as Israelites or Ephraimites, among other names)" for adapting Jewish practices to their worship, for calling their leaders "Rabbis", and for believing that they are physically descended from Israel. The article also seems to focus on Eddie Chumney who has proven himself an ally, friend, and supporter of Brit-Am.  We DO NOT AGREE WITH THE RELIGIOUS IDEAS OF EDDIE CHUMNEY in the same way as he does not agree with us. WE DO AGREE concerning the physical Israelite ancestry of many people in the Western World even if they belong to religions other than Judaism.

According to Eddie Chumney the person who wrote the "Cleveland Jewish News" article defines herself as Orthodox but received some guidance from a Messianic Jewish personality. The Messianic Jews are a development of the "Jews for Jesus" who were not simply Jews who became Christians but Jews and non-Jews backed by an offshoot of the Baptist Church. The unfortunate indiviuals concerned have problems of their own along with a tendency as part of their doctrine to demonize Orthodox Judaism. A European agent for the "Messianic Jews" in Italy who calls himself Avraham Sandor dedicated several months of his life to attacking Brit-Am in every way he could. An answer to one of these attacks appears on our website.
"The Completeness of the Exile"
"Answers to Deniers of Brit-Am Biblical Truth"
This Brit-Am answer is replying to a vicious foul-mouthed attack on Brit-Am. The person who wrote the attack is a Messianic Jewish activist (though apparently not Jewish himself) amongst the Gypsies. He now claims to be a Gypsy. In the past he has also claimed to be an Hungarian, a Yemenite Jew, and an Assyrian (Iraqi) Christian!
At all events someone appears to have funded this anti-Brit-Am activity. Who?

Getting back to the "Cleveland Jewish News" article: It says (Excerpts only, for complete text go to "Cleveland Jewish News" article):

"These gentiles in Jewish clothing actually claim to be the true Israelites in direct, biological descendants of the lost tribe of Ephraim. Of course there are no DNA or blood tests to confirm this unsubstantiated claim.

"Angus Wootten, one of the movements grandaddies, explains in his book Restoring Israels Kingdom how someone can find out if he or she is a biological member of the tribe of Ephraim: You simply have a conviction, a knowing that we know.

"While this David Koresh-sounding theology appears ridiculous to both Jews and the vast majority of Christians, the sobering fact is that their numbers are growing constantly. From their websites and links, it would appear there are about 30 Ephraim-style groups in Ohio alone, although its hard to get an exact count because they use so many names Ephraimites, Hebraic Roots Christians, Lost Tribes, Northern Kingdom, Israelites, House of Israel, Messianic Christians, and House of Joseph.

"While Hebraic Rooters claim to unite Jews and Christians as their ultimate goal, in reality, they seem to hold both groups in disdain. Jews seem to think they are Cokes (the real thing), says Wootten in his book Restoring. He questions Jewish ancestral lines (that have) been affected by conversions, adoptions and extramarital sex (fornication, adultery or rape). He seems to have particular disdain for the Orthodox, labeling them, among other things, as mean-spirited rock-throwers. Christians fare no better under Woottens scathing pen: They are guilty of Esaus folly in throwing away their birthright as the biological heirs of the tribe of Ephraim.

"Tired of being second-class citizens, these self-proclaimed Ephraimites demand that Jews recognize them as Israelites and that would include rights to the Middle East real estate.

" In 1948, ... instead of naming this Jewish state Judah ... they named it Israel, Wooten writes. Now, in one fell swoop, the Jews grabbed the title back. Wootten is appalled that these Jews had the chutzpah to name their country Israel when those of his tribe knew it was partially theirs!

"Eddie Chumney, who was a computer specialist before going full-time into the ministry almost a decade ago also founded Hebraic Roots International, which claims a database network of subscribers in all 50 states and in 55 foreign countries. He travels extensively, both nationally and internationally, at the invitation of gentile groups who want to hear about their lost (but now found!) heritage.

"Raised Protestant, Chumney says he was awakened to what the New Testament really teaches after studying Jewish texts and taking Torah classes from a Reform rabbi in Akron. Chumney accuses Jews of blindness for not acknowledging their Northern Kingdom relatives. He threatens that peace will only come to Israel when they do so. He also says that Christians are drunkards like Ephraim, who have been lied to over the millennia mostly because of the Catholic Church as to what Jesus really taught.

"The gospel according to Chumney is that Jesus came to unite the two kingdoms (i.e., Jews and Israelites) and teach the Israelites (gentile Christians) to observe Jewish law. Of course, this is contrary to halachah (Jewish law), which actually says gentiles are forbidden to observe Shabbat, a doctrine which Chumney asserts is false and put forth by the rabbis. Its a title he occasionally uses himself. (See sidebar, p. 29.)

"The Chumney/Wootten type of teaching is mushrooming. Rick Ross, an internationally-recognized cult expert, and a former Clevelander, calls it a growing phenomenon in the United States.

"Ross runs into these groups all the time, but says the Hebraic Roots movement is really just an old teaching with a facelift. He points out that the Worldwide Church of God, founded by Herbert Armstrong in 1934, taught that Anglo-Saxons are direct descendants of the 10 lost tribes of Israel, and that church viewed that teaching as the key, unlocking a true understanding of biblical prophecy. At its peak, there were 65,000 Armstrongists, says Ross.

"These groups are very misleading and very disingenuous, he cautions. They have an affinity for Jewish holidays and symbols but have no Jewish background whatsoever, says Ross. It really becomes a shanda (shame), as my grandmother would say, when they start parading around with Torah scrolls and trotting out Jewish symbols.
 
The above excerpts more or less impart what the article says.  Objectively it does not say very much but it has caused something of a stir. Discussions around the article also brought up the point that Brit-Am seems to focus on "physical" descent which some find offensive.
 
In answer to the article:
Christians should not missionize to Jews. Jews do not encourage conversion to Judaism. Christianity exists. It was founded by Jews and could be said to have at least in part "Hebrew roots". If Christians wish to emphasize the "Hebrew roots" of their religion I do not see why they should not. For more on this point see below.

The article quotes from Angus Wootten whose statements appear to be out of line but are no worse than what some leading Jewish "intellectuals" misguidedly say frequently and nobody bats an eye. [How many anti-Semitic sites DO NOT quote "nut-cases" like Arthur Koestler or Barry Chamish?] Even so, the statements were not correct and not in place.

In a reply to criticism against Angus, Batya Wootten says that the offensive quotation was taken out of context and that their true beliefs and that of their organization are the opposite of the negative impression that was given.
See our answer below to Question no.6 where a letter on this matter from Batya Woootten is given in full.

"Ephraimites" are criticized for believing they are physical descendants of Israel but what if they are? "Brit-Am" proves that they are. If one disagrees then let them try to refute the proofs of Brit-Am rather than speak disparagingly without justifying it.

As for rights to Israel we have answered this question at great length elsewhere, e.g.
"General: 4. "Do you think that members of the Lost Tribes should move to Israel at present?"


A feeling of connection to the Land amongst Christians actually is for the good of the Jews since it nearly always leads to support of the Zionist cause.
Eddie Chumney is quoted as saying that a solution to the State of  Israel's problems requires the recognition of "Ephraim". He is probably right on this point and if he is not, so what? Where is the offence?
It is true that Jewish law is against Gentiles keeping Shabbat but none of the "Ephraimites" actually do keep it as Jews understand the concept of "Keeping" to entail: They just worship on that day in addition perhaps to some religious social activities.
Someone called "Ross" is quoted as speaking in the name of his Yiddish-speaking grandmother. Well, well. It is nice to have a family.
 
As I understand it:
According to most Rabbinical authorities a non-Jew is commanded like a Jew to believe in God but if the Gentile holds that God is some kind of combination (e.g. Trinity or what not) he (though mistaken) is not committing idolatry whereas a Jew would be. A less stringent standard is applied to the non-Jew. This is the Law.
For a Jew such a belief is considered idolatry and a Jew is commanded to let himself be killed if necessary and not admit to such a doctrine.
Christianity as a faith in general holds that it is necessary to bring others to believe as they do. In effect Christians who try to convert Jews are attempting to bring the Jew to commit idolatry as defined by Jewish Law.
Judaism does not encourage Gentiles to become Jews since, among other reasons this causes resentment amongst the non-Jewish religious authorities. In the UK for instance there is an unwritten agreement with the Anglican Church that Jews will not proselytize and the Church will leave the Jews alone though this aspect of the agreement has historically not been kept.
 
We therefore have a problem with Christianity in general. We have however learned to live with it though many Christian leaders DO take account of Jewish sensibilities. At all events the Jewish attitude has been to let things be and only protest Christian activity when this specifically targets Jews. The Messianic Jews do target Jews and err grievously in doing so. The Messianic Ephramites on the whole do not "go after" Jews but rather here and there imitate some Jewish customs. Therefore if Jewish activists intend to criticize anyone they should concentrate upon the turncoats of their own kind who are the real danger. We do not have to go far to find historical parallels for this phenomenon. The Jewish section of the Communist Party in Russia (Yevsektsia) was the cause of uprooting the Jewish religion amongst the Jews of Russia.
 
The Ephramites are not alone in imitating Jewish customs. This is a widespread phenomenon at present amongst Christians in general. Even Roman Catholics in some areas are affected by a new urge to return to " Hebrew Roots". It is impossible to predict how things will turn out but so far this "Hebraic" tendency has been positive from the Jewish point of view. It is related to and part of the growing Fundamentalist and Evangelical tendency to identify with the Jewish State of Israel and support it.
 

 
We see the question of a return to Hebrew Roots in religious practice as an internal matter for Christians to decide amongst themselves. Nevertheless the whole phenomenon may be viewed as symptomatic in our generation of "Ephraim" instinctively wishing to return to his source.

We are not racists. Our attitude towards "race" may be seen from our writings and articles dedicated to this subject. One becomes Jewish either through inheritance or conversion but the emphasis is on inheritance. The same applies to membership of the physical body of Israel in general.

Brit-Am as an organization holds that descendants of the Lost Ten Tribes are today to be found on the whole amongst "Western" people. The activities of Brit-Am are Research (Biblical, Biblically-related, and Secular); Revelation (Propagating Research results); and Reconciliation meaning helping to heal the breach between Judah and Joseph.

Brit-Am is not a religion and we try to avoid discussions on inter-faith matters.
The present case is an exception and we hope to keep it that way.

For more on these and related matters go to our entry:
"Queries About Ephraimites"

6. Question. In articles that Brit-Am replied to an unfavorable impression was given by others concerning the Messianic Israelite Alliance headed by Angus and Batya Wootten.
How does Brit-Am relate to this?

Answer:
In the above Question no.1: ("What is your Reply to MJA Criticism?") we replied to an article against Brit-Am "Ephraimite" type beliefs.
In this article the Messianic Israel Alliance (MIA) headed by Angus and Batya Wootten was also criticized.
Likewise Brit-Am replied to another article which though written by somebody else depended in part on similar sources to the first one and quoted somewhat-negative statements made by Angus Wootten who it is now stated was unfairly quoted out of context.

See the above Question no.5 ( "Brit-Am, The Jewish Aspect, and Eddie Chumney." Brit-Am and Brit-Am type beliefs have been unjustly attacked by elements associated with the so-called "Messianic Jews". Are "Ephraimites" preferable?" ).

[Before reading this note I would earnestly request everybody not to associate us with any form of Christian doctrine whatsoever nor to involve us in any way in disputes that do not concern Brit-Am beliefs].

From: Batya

Shalom Yair,
I received your note inviting us to dissociate ourselves from the negative points being posted by and about "Messianic Ephraimites" and I thank you for the opportunity.
As you know, there is a distinct difference in actually quoting someone verbatim and surrounding a word or two in "quotes" with opinions of what the supposedly quoted individual actually said. In other words, personal interpretation of a statement does not equal a verbatim quote of what was actually said.
The paper posted by the MJAA against us is comprised of malicious and unfounded slander. It is lashan hara in its worst form and its perpetrators need to be ashamed of themselves. We refuted Dan Juster in a bound Report that was published and delivered to him more than ten years ago, yet he and his compatriots continue to defame us, despite our many claims to the contrary (see "Is the Church Ephraim: A Report"
(http://www.messianicisrael.com/Store/Books/whoisisrael.html).

The MIA posted an open letter decrying the MJAA error: "We Declare These Truths To Be Self-Evident." This twelve page brochure includes a letter from the MIA Shepherds Council that outlines many key beliefs held by the Messianic Israel Alliance. It also refutes misunderstandings put forth by some regarding our beliefs
(http://www.messianicisrael.com/Teachings/WeDeclareScreen.pdf).

I (Batya) wrote my first book about both the houses of Israel in 1988 and have written several books since then, the most well known being "Who is Israel?" Many people have, in my opinion, taken my work, and the works of my husband, and turned them into bad rewrites. They have taught about Israel's two houses but have, again, in my opinion, misrepresented Israel's God with their meanness. However, we cannot be held responsible for the sins of others. It seems that the only fair thing is to judge each one based on their record.

For the record, we have always taught that it is the God of Israel who has brought the Jewish people back to the Promised Land. We have never spoken against Judah, and we stand against those who come against them. We encourage those who believe they are part of the Lost Tribes, or Ephraimites, to have a servants heart when it comes to their Jewish brothers. We believe the only way that Ephraim has any hope of returning to the Land would be at Judah's pleasure. Moreover, we teach that our God planned it this way, because He wants Ephraim to be a help to Judah and not a hindrance.

As for the Messiah, we believe that is Yeshua, but we do not seek to win people to Him with talk. If we cannot win people to Him with our walk, perhaps we need to remain quiet.

In summation, we have had countless lies told about us and what we teach, but they are always based on errant interpretation. People need to learn the difference between a legitimate quote and a fabricated story that is promoted with malice of forethought.

Moreover, like every organization, we have had people come and go. Some tried to take over while they were here, but the MIA stands today as an organization of which we, Angus and Batya Wootten, are proud to be the founders. Its leadership is, Hale Harris (General Secretary), Scott Diffenderfer (COO), and John Conrad, Shepherd. They are men of the highest integrity who seek to surround themselves with men of integrity. All of us ask that we be judged based on what we teach and not based on the work of those with whom we are not associated
(http://www.messianicisrael.com/MIA/hope.html ).

Again I thank you for the opportunity to sound off.
Shalom to you and yours,
Batya Wootten

7. What is the attitude of Brit-Am to Christianity?

Answer: We in Brit-Am try NOT to get involved in denominational issues.
Brit-Am has no official stand on the issue.
In a private capacity the heads of Brit-Am and much of its support in Israel are practising Orthodox Jews. Our personal attitude may be summarized along the following lines:
In the Messianic Era all religious issues and disputes will be resolved.
The return of the Tribes and initial steps towards reconciliation may begin well before the Messianic area and before religious questions have been solved. This is a possibility indicated by Scripture (Ezekiel 11:18-20) but even in this case we are not making a stand one way or other since there is no need to do so.
It is permitted to discuss scripture with Christians since they acknowledge the Divine Source of the Hebrew Bible.
The Lost Ten Tribes at this stage have the temporary status of Gentiles.
Gentiles are allowed to believe in Christinaity whereas Jews are forbidden to do so. Christians are forbidden to proselytize Jews.
Jews do not try to convert Christians.
Christianity may be seen as a tool of Divine Providence to bring the Lost Ten Tribes back to an ultimate reconciliation with Judah. Christians in non-Israelite nations are often antagonistic towards Judah. On the other hand Israelites from the Lost Ten Tribes are often led by Christianity to believe in the Bible, to feel an awareness of Hebraic belonging, and a closeness to Judah and the State of Israel.
All of the above is consistent with Rabbinical Sources..