|Contents by Subject||
Contents in Alphabetical Order
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 <email@example.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,
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.
"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 <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Re: Brit-Am Now no. 1389
#1. Steven Collins defends an Ephraimite
NATION AND A COMPANY OF NATIONS. Brit-Am Reply
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.
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.
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
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.
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;
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.
"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
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
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?