Printable Page

Wasn't Ephraim Divorced Forever?

. . . backsliding Israel [House of Ephraim] hath justified herself more than [the] treacherous [House of] Judah.  Go and proclaim these words toward the north, and say, Return, thou backsliding Israel [Ephraim], saith the Lord, and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you; for I am merciful, saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger forever ...    For I am married unto you. (Jeremiah 3:11-15)

Shalom Brother Moshe:

I have just read this article  on Dr. Siberlings and came across this reference toJer 3:11-15.  I canot find where it states "for I am married unto you"in these verses. In fact in Jer 3:8 it states: "And I saw that for all the causes for which backsliding Yisra'el (Ephraim) had committed adultery, I had put her away and given her a  certificate of divorce;"  YHWH has divorced Ephraim, they are not under covenant, however Judah is still under covenant.

Patricia

Shalom Rabbi:

The first point I was actually making was that it does not say "for I am married to you" in Jer 3:11-15 This statement is not in these scriptures - just making a correction. The second point was about Ephraim being divorced - and I don't know yet if I can agree with you that it was "temporal." The covenant was cut with both houses but YHWH divorced
Ephraim. Shalom

Patricia

You are right about the word "marriage," it is not in the text and he should not have used it. This will be my final response due to my time constraints. What you are claiming is both a logical and historical absurdity. Jeremiah prophecies that the House of Israel, aka Ephraim, would enter into a "New Covenant" thus commencing Israel's regathering. This prophecy is about 150 years after the supposed divorce. Yahweh does not prophecy a covenant which in its very essence is a marriage contract with Ephraim 150 years after he supposedly divorced Ephraim, without intending to rescue them.

Further and finally in Jeremiah 31:19-20, Yahweh states that "for though I spoke against him I still remembered him" and in verse 9 of Jeremiah 31, Yahweh states that 150 years after this supposed divorce Ephraim was STILL HIS FIRSTBORN. Hosea 8:11 Yahweh states "how can I give you up Ephraim how could I hand you over Israel", then in verse 9 in the clearest possible terms, he states despite punishment that he will NOT DESTROY EPHRAIM.

Patricia, I think where you are getting confused is in the difference between Hosea 1:4 and Hosea 1:10-11. As a nation or kingdom v. 4 of Hosea 1, they are destroyed never to be a nation again. As individuals they are not destroyed but rescued by Messiah as they appoint Messiah to be their head along with Judah (Hosea 1:11) in the day of Jezreal or the ingathering of the scattered seed. Verse 10 of Hosea 1 talks of them as individuals becoming children of Yahweh.

Keep studying!
Shalom

CIRCUMCISION FORBIDDEN?

Shalom Brother Moshe;

I thank you for your reply on the Feasts of Yahweh. I am trying to understand so that I may teach, so I hope you don't mind a few questions. I would draw your attention to Galatians 5:1-8. I of course do not wish to put any hindrances on anyone that would keep them from coming to the knowledge of Yahshua HaMashiach. I try to understand. If in verses 3 & 4, this is in fact what Paul talks about in trying to understand and obey Jewish customs and laws. Can you please help me to understand and clarify this in my own mind? Please excuse me if I have said something to offend, as this is not my intent.

Pastor James Wolfe Jr.
Valley Christian Ministries Harrison, Ohio

The circumcision Rav Shaul forbids, is not the penis which is the eternal token to all the male Israelite offspring of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, rather he forbids non-Israelites from being or becoming or converting to the nation of the circumcision, as a prerequisite for salvation. In other words the Galatian heresy was that Jewish believers were telling non-Israelites that THEY WERE NOT OR COULD NEVER BE SAVED BY FAITH ALONE, without an outward act of physical circumcision, or physically becoming Jews via conversion! This was and still is heresy and is addressed by Rav Shaul, since the gospel is to "whosoever will." To prove that this is the correct application, Rav Shaul would be a major hypocrite, if he told non-Israelite believers not to be penis circumcised, when he himself physically circumcised Timothy, who was not an Israelite in Acts 16:1-3. Therefore if he did what he supposedly told the Galatians not to do, then he was a hypocrite who did not write under inspiration. Since you and I know that not to be the case, it must be our initial misunderstanding of what he is teaching, that lies as the problem. He forbids circumcision, to Judaism i.e. conversion and reaffirmed that conviction in 1st Corinthians. 7. He would never and did not ever forbid penis circumcision to Timothy, who was a non-Israelite based on having a Greek father. Hope that helps! Let me know what you want me to do with those books.

Dear Rabbi,

I just today discovered your website and am thankful that I have. For a couple of days I have had great confusion sweep over me and decided to pray to Yahweh, instead of referring to Him as Lord, or God as I had been. Today many of the answers, which I had been seeking, came via your website. I especially like your series "The Full Restoration of Israel", as this is what I had been thinking from my own studies. Although not fleshed out as you have done it, due to the fact that I have been doing most of my studying with no help. A lot of people who I try to share some of my findings with simply think I am nuts (maybe your well written series will open their eyes)! I found your message board and found the exact answer to another question, which I had been praying about. I just wanted to tell you thank you. I have felt deep in my heart that I was an Israelite of the lost tribes. Your study clarified that and also helped with a few things that I could not grasp. Just wanted to let you know. Thank you so much for a very enlightening site. Sorry this is so long. In Sincerity,

Judy Riggs.
Parts Unknown

I am a believer in Yahshua. I have read almost everything on your website. Your "two house" theology is something I had never heard of before. As I studied the Scriptures along side your teachings I began to sense that I was in fact a long lost blood relative to Jews, an "Ephraimite Israelite." I wasn't quite satisfied that the Bible actually stood for "replacement" theology, or dispensationalism. Then I came across your teachings. I must say, I was completely astounded. However, as I continued investigating and studying, I came across something called "British-Israelism" or "Anglo-Israelism." After studying the history of this movement, I began to wonder why I had not seen anything about this in your teachings.

As I am sure you are well aware, early on this century Herbert W. Armstrong took this bull by the horns and ran with it. He is now deceased, and his Worldwide Church of God in 1995 recanted the "Anglo-Israelitism" doctrines. The Seventh-Day Adventists have also latched on to the "Anglo-Israelitism" bandwagon and I believe they are still on board with it.

My question is why haven't you addressed this more directly, in your teachings? If uncovering the true identity of the lost Ephraimite/Israelites is of paramount importance, why have you not at least addressed the history of this movement in Great Britain and in the U.S. in order to help those who are already familiar with "Anglo-Israelitism?" It seems to me that any sincere truth seeker would not accept your teachings, without much study and prayer and this is what I have been doing, as the Bereans did so long ago. And in the course of my studies of the Scriptures and church history, I came across this movement. How is your teaching not just another modern manifestation of "Anglo-Israelitism?" How is what you are saying anything different from the off base and now debunked views of Herbert W. Armstrong (and the rest of "Anglo-Israelitism")? I would very much like for you to address this issue by personal reply to this e-mail. If not I'll assume the point is not worth spending time or energy on, but I have to say, that would leave your teaching quite suspect in my eyes.

Seeking the Truth,
Matt Redard

It is great that you have written. I have just completed an extensive teaching showing the clear differences between Anglo-Israelism and the two houses as Yahshua Himself taught it. You are holding it in your hands! I agree with you that this teaching has been a long time coming and needed for many different reasons including clarification! Shalom!

Dear Friend,

The scripture that you sighted, in the article that you sent this morning (Part Six), Second Samuel 7:10 and First Chronicles 17:9, are taking about King David and his son Solomon's kingdom being established forever. The Kingdom of Yahweh a.k.a. David's Kingdom, was established in his son Solomon, has never lacked a man to sit on his throne, just as He decreed. The throne ceased to exist with Zedekiah in the land of Judah. However Yahweh's promise to David was not annulled by this overturn. All of Zedekiah's male offspring were either destroyed or castrated so that at least Satan hoped that David's heir would be destroyed. But Yahweh always keeps His word and he preserved a princess who emerged with a prince of the lineage of Zarah, who was seated in the midst of Israel. Israel had migrated to Ireland then to Scotland and then to England/Wales and can be traced directly from David through Solomon. Yes just as the Father promised the throne of David is alive and well on planet earth and soon the Messiah will return and take it back. But before that happens there will be once again a great martyrdom of all Sabbath keeping people. The main thing is for all of us to have our armor of the word of Yahweh around us and our Sword sharp and oil in our lamps for the times just ahead of us.

Ethel Cody
Parts Unknown

I pray that after digesting the things I most truthfully shared in this month's teaching after months of personal research, that you now are able to see and receive the correction that is needed in your thinking. That is my prayer for you!