Ever since God began the process of regathering the nation of Israel to the Land of Israel, there has developed within Christians a number of rationales to explain how they should be related to this regathered Israel. Unfortunately, many of these attempts are based on faulty theology which can only lead to disappointment, or worse, to disaster in the future. One such theory sees the remnant of Christian believers who have a "heart" for Israel identified with the scattered tribes of the northern kingdom of Israel who were carried into dispersion by the Assyrians in 722 BC/BCE. This theory is based primarily on an obscure prophecy made by Israel concerning his grandson Ephraim (Genesis 48:19). Even though very general, and therefore very difficult to interpret with precision, this verse is taken to mean that the dispersed northern tribes have become a distinct people among the gentiles who are now being called to return to Israel and to their position within the Land of Israel. Granted, if there were a systematic development of this theme throughout the Bible then such an interpretation might be possible. In reality there is no such development. Instead the Bible develops a completely different explanation for gentile believers which is ignored by those who wish to explain their position by use of the prophecy concerning Ephraim.

Those who envision their position in this way see the prophecy recorded by Ezekiel (37:15-23) concerning the joining of the stick of Ephraim and the stick of Judah as an explanation of what is happening today. These Ephraimites are being joined with Jews (Israelis) to build up the Land of Israel. A few other Scriptures are cited to support this conclusion.

Four hundred years after God made a covenant with Israel at Mt. Sinai, He made a subsequent covenant with David (actually with David's son). He promised this son of David a kingdom, a throne, and a house eternally. The short-term fulfillment of this prophecy was accomplished by Solomon and to a lesser extent by the descendants of David who ruled in Judea for the following 400 years. The long-term fulfillment is the Tzemach prophesized by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 23:5-6) and other Hebrew prophets. We interpret that Tzemach to be Jesus of Nazareth.

The Messianic scriptures (New Testament) relate Jesus to this covenant with David. Indeed, one of the Messianic titles applied to Jesus was "son of David". The New Testament also connects a people with Messiah Jesus, a body of spiritually-initiated believers who see Him as Lord and Savior and have been gathered around the King. These people are generally referred to as the Church. An obvious distinction is being made here between this Church and the much larger body of people who claim to be Christians but who know Him neither as Lord nor Savior.

A believer must function as a part of a local body of believers in order to be instrumental in God's purpose.

The Biblically prescribed instrument within which these spiritually-initiated believers are to operate is the local body of believers or the local church. The primary vision for this church was developed by the Apostle Paul in his letters to the many churches which he was instrumental in forming throughout the Roman Empire. We understand from these letters that individual born-again members of local bodies receive the Holy Spirit in order to become functional within the church (I Corinthians 12:7) and that the body, taken as a distinct entity, has the capacity for the manifestation of its head, Messiah Jesus. Seen in this manner, Messiah Jesus operates through the local church to accomplish exactly the same types of things that He did in His direct ministry 2,000 years ago. So we conclude that a believer must function as a part of a local body of believers in order to be instrumental in God's purpose.

One other point must be made here. God clearly distinguished the early church from Israel in such a way as to cause a separation between the body of Messiah and Israel. Firstly, He poured out His anointing on the early Jerusalem church in a powerful way. So, even though we would see all of this group as Orthodox Jews, they were separated from Israel, in general, by this anointing. Secondly, God brought a gentile into this group as a fully functional member without requiring him to be circumcised. This position was confirmed by the leaders of the early church in the conference held in Jerusalem (recorded in Acts 15). This second step guaranteed that the Church would be held separate from Israel because uncircumcised membership in the Church was seen as violating Torah.

Church leaders of subsequent centuries furthered this separation by all kinds of unscriptural doctrines. Most of these steps were taken in an effort to widen the separation from Israel. However, without regard for the unscriptural steps taken by the church fathers, God clearly distinguished the early church in Jerusalem from the people of Israel. We maintain that it was always the responsibility of the Church to maintain a common identity with Israel and that the primary responsibility of the Church was to be an anointed component of Israel in the process of redemption.

Now in spite of the incredible mess made by Church leaders for almost 2,000 years, the Biblical pattern defined in the New Testament still remains the authoritative pattern for real believers. Please note that from a covenant perspective, all of this is related to the Tzemach for David, that is Jesus the Messiah, and has nothing, whatsoever, to do with Ephraim.

It seems evident that many who embrace the doctrine of Ephraim are people who for whatever reason have rejected the local church as the scriptural expression of their faith. Perhaps they have been hurt in the Church or have been manipulated and mislead by uninspired or corrupt leaders. Perhaps they are involved in a para-church ministry which sees the local church in a competitive way. Perhaps they, particularly as Americans, embrace an unscriptural view of individualism which is easily adapted to the vision of Ephraim but which would have to be crucified if they were to become a part of a local church. Probably some or all of these things apply.

There are a number of dangers inherent in the Ephraim doctrine.

There are a number of dangers inherent in the Ephraim doctrine. If people truly believe that they are descended from the northern tribes, than logically, they will eventually attempt to return to the Land and occupy their inheritance. This will bring them into direct conflict with Israel. Indeed, this results in just another form of replacement theology.

These folks could simply convert to Judaism. Judaism is an open religion which receives converts. The rabbis may make some minor attempt to discourage conversion; nevertheless, if persistent one can do so. Obviously, to do so necessitates the denial that Jesus, Yeshua, Yehoshua or whatever name we use, is Messiah, Savior and Lord.

The most significant problem with the Ephraim doctrine is that real believers who have a heart for Israel are sidelined from real effective spiritual ministry within Israel in these most significant days of redemption. The power, glory and love of Messiah Yeshua should be boldly manifested through local bodies to Israel in this time when the secular leadership of Israel is miserably failing to bring Israel into a position of blessing and fruitfulness in God's presence and purpose.