Perhaps parallel and alligned with the Jewish attitude toward Jesus Christ and the House of David is the Jewish antagonism against Ephraim who it Israel. True the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed and the bulk carried away and were 'lost', which left only the Kingdom of Judah intact at that particular time. Later Judah, the Kingdom thereof, was also distroyed and carried off to Babylon. Both histories, 'Kings' and 'Chronicles' end their history at the point of the Babylonian captivity, with Chronicles but barely mentioning that Cyrus had proclaimed the return of the Jews to Jerusalem. This in itself is a testament as to when these two 'histories' were lastly so edited and compiled, that being that interim of the Babylonian captivity or shortly in consequence of it. All other 'history' is left to the books of the minor prophets concerning the Jewish return and their building of the temple. Certainly this is one such time of such compilation and collecting and writing that which pertained to the Jews and it must be considered that it was prepared and/or preserved and edited from that particular skew of the Jewish perspective. [Note: Ezekiel was commanded to take and write the Stick of Judah. Whether this places Ezekiel as the primary or beginning editor and compiler the Jewish histories is of some speculative question. Certainly it was commanded of him, and perhaps by his iniative though through the efforts of some others, it was carried out. Yet it does add much light and insight to the nature of these histories to so consider that it was preserved and compiled of the Jews down and until the end of the Babylonian captivity and then stops.]

Judah Has Prevailed in Israel

"For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler, but the birthright was Joseph's:" ~ 1 Chronicles 5:2

This is the very perspective from which the Jews percieve the world. They and only they are Israel. They and only then have prevailed. The Messiah, who from their perspective is yet to come, will be of the tribe of Judah and the whole of the Abraham Covenant but applies in, of and through them, the Jews. In that day they returned to Jerusalem after their own 70 captivity, they scorned and would not recognize the poor of the northern land, the Ephraimite Samaritans who had remained in the land but not as a 'kingdom'. The Jews hated/vexed the Samaritans, holding them to being even less than a Gentile. Even in the time of Christ, as they seemed to still have among them the true understanding concerning the ancestry of the House of David, did correctly ascert speaking to Christ, 'Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan?' (John 8:48). To that that truth spoken with slanderous intonation they added the lie, 'and hast a devil?' To this the Savior replied first correcting the lie by stating, "I have not a devil" (John 8:49). And then in dualistic implications he further stated, 'but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me.' Yes Jesus was of Ephrathite/Ephraimite descent as was David from Obed the son raised up to the dead house of Mahlon and Elimelech, and through the 'mixed' marriages of that House of David, which included descent from Rachab of Jericho, Ruth of Moab, and Bathsheba the Hittite wife of Uriah; among countless others of royal marriages; Jesus the Son of David could 'very well' be considered as being a Samaritan. But on the one hand the Jews honored their relationship by blood to the House of King David, their 'chief ruler', yet in so dishonoring Jesus with the title of Samaritan, they did not honor their claimed father David. And Jesus did not only honor his descent from David, being that promised Son of David, but he did also honor his Father in Heaven, who those who are poscessed with the devil do not so honor just as the Phrasiees had just been guilty of doing, dishonoring David and the Messiah to come from thence.

And now even today Judah does still sit in their prideful self irogance in denying but to themselves the Covenant of Abraham. And they persist in their position to look down upon the rest of the world, not believing any but themselves as having the descent and right to the Covenant and Blessings of Abraham. They flatly deny any who claim to be of Ephraim who is Israel by the blessing hand of Jacob, little alone to any such concept that a restoration and gathering of Israel will come by the seed of Joseph, the seed of Ephraim. And though they pretend, fain and/or imagine there to be two 'Messiahs', Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David, still they refuse Ephraim any part in the gathering of the people from the four corners of the earth. And this would directly apply to such beliefs of the LDS faith which so places that latter day burden upon Ephraim as assisted by Manasseh, the two sons of Joseph.

Consider that if the Jew cannot accept the Samaritan into the society of the Kingdom of Israel and the Covenant of Abraham, how could they ever believe that Jesus is and was the Messiah ben Joseph as well as being the Messiah ben David, which is but one and the same Messiah? Judah sought with his brothers to murder Joseph, thus he supposing himself to be the heir of Jacob. When Reuben prohitted that, it was Judah who conspired to sell Joseph into obsurity and slavery, thereby once again assuming the birthright from Jacob. When the Kingdom of Israel is destroyed and the bulk of the people taking into other nations, it is the Jewish compilers of the Stick of Judah who have proclaimed that they have 'prevailed over their brethren'. And today, Judah still preceives themselves as the sole hiers and bearers of the Covenant of Abraham and in such manner as keeping it from the rest of the world.

John the Baptist exclaimed to the Jews that even of these 'stones' (a 'stone' being a reference to the Gentiles, they being 'dead' as to the Covenant of Abraham from the Jewish perspective) God could and would raise up sons unto Abraham. Whether by actual linage or by adoption therein under the Covenant of God, it is the same, the seed of Ephraim, or Joseph, is taking the Gospel and Blessing of the Covenant of Abraham into all the world. The Jews flat out reject this. And they call it the 'Ephraimite Error'.

He Is Our Near Kin

After Judah rejected David in favor of David's son Absolom, upon the defeat of Absolom and his death by the aid of Israel, David rides back into Jerusalem and the Jews now turn and accept David to the 'envy' of Israel, for David has by his actions chosen Judah over Israel (2 Samuel 19:41-43). When questioned, the Jews flaunt that 'they are near kinsman of the king', and this of course by the blood line descent from Boaz by Ruth and their son Obed. To this Israel points out that they are 10 tribes in Israel, thus holding ten parts in the king of Israel. Then Israel also points out that they further have a greater right than blood kinmanship to the king when they add, "and we have also more right in David than ye". What is that 'more in David' than that consituted by blood linage? It could only be that by and according to the Law of God, Obed was heir to the proper House of Israel, the propher House of Ephraim, being raised up as the heir of the dead house of Mahlon and Elimelech, they being the linage of the Covenant from Ephraim, the firstborn of Israel (Jeremiah 31:9).

Yet on the one hand the Jews tout their 'kinship' with King David, their blood relation. And at the same time they have dishonored that House of David, even the very Son of David, the Messiah, by slandering him in their inotation of 'saying well that he is a Samaritan'. And they do continue to play the two sides to their own favor, so imagining and dividing the Messiah into two, making a Messiah ben Joseph/Ephraim though not allowing Ephraim a part in the Covenant of Abraham and the gathering of Israel; as well as Messiah ben David, who by their own 'well saying' understood very well that the House of David was of Ephraim and the Son of David could be said to that same as the Samaritans were, a mixed seed of Ephraim. And so they did reject the very Messiah, the one and only Messiah, the Son of Joseph of Egypt, the Son of David, the very Son of God the Father, the only Son Begotten in the flesh unto the salvation of all mankind.

The Jewish Hatred of the Samaritan

Beyond accusing Jesus Christ as being a Samaritan, though justly so, the Jews have long hated the Samaritans, that Ephraimite 'mixture' which was and has not been lost and scattered among all the nations of the earth in location, but yet in mixture of marriage while retaining their lands, the Jews have long hated Ephraim the son of the Covenant, the heir of Jacob and Joseph.

That hatred first started when Judah realized that Reuben, Simeon and Levi had forefooted their rights to the birthright Covenant of Abraham, and that he, Judah, was next in line in age to stand as the heir of his father Jacob. Among all the sons of Jacob, Judah stood to gain the most from the removal of Joseph. It had become obvious by the dreams of Joseph and Jacob's gift to Joseph of the Coat of the Covenant, the 'Rainbow' coat of many colors, that Jacob's mind had settled upon Joseph to his heir, the firstborn son of his first chosen wife, Rachel. Even Rachel herself had so indicated her own seed to be that of the ancestry to the Messiah, the Messiah ancestry being a fundamental part of the Covenant of Abraham.

Judah's hatred of Joseph, his attempt to have him murdered in covenant with his brothers, his selling Joseph into slavery when Reuben rejected that fate of his brother Joseph, all began the great vexation of Joseph and Ephraim by Judah. Judah would covet and evenually claim outright being the only 'surviving' heir to the Covenant of Abraham. And thus from the father to his sons and tribe the vexation and hatred had continued and does still continue in Judah today. Ephraim, though the chosen son by Jacob in the place of Reuben, was that barier to Judah which kept Judah from the claim of the covenant, the firstborn. And though presevered in Jewish scripture that Joseph was the 'firstborn' of the covenant (1 Chronicles 5:2) and Ephraim was the 'firstborn' of Israel as stated by the voice of the Lord through Jeremiah (Jeremiah 31:9), it would still today be Judah who would and does claim all the blessing of the Covenant of Abraham unto himself. And thus Judah shows forth little understanding as to what that Covenant blessing was, as it was unto all the kindreds of the earth that a Savior would be provided for their salvation and is to be carried forth and given unto them by way of invitation to come unto the Redeemer and be made his. Thus Judah in his self-centered selfishness does continue to deny to the world the way unto the Kingdom of God. And instead of shedding forth God's love unto all His children, Judah does deny such to all but who are of Judah.

The irony is that Judah does not have or carry that Covenant. It is not theirs by right as being descendants of Judah. It is by right that which belongs and pertains unto the Kingdom of Israel, Israel now being Ephraim as it was upon Ephraim that Jacob bestowed that blessing and name (see JST 48). And yet Judah does hate and despise all who may be of Ephraim from the Samaritan to those of the 'Zionistic' Christian religions who profess an inheritance in Ephraim. Even Jesus had not the earthly right by his blood descent from Judah in Boaz. It only came by his Law of God order of raising up seed to the dead house of Mahlon and Elimelech, Ephrathites meaning Ephraimites.

The Ephraimite Error

In its simplist form, the Jews are stating in the entitled 'Ephraimite Error', "Judah! Not Ephraim or Joseph!".

The Traditional Jews, hold that the Messiah is to be a Jew and that Salvation is to come but by the Jews, have discounting the 'spliting' of 'the covenant' roles between Ephraim and Judah. The implication being that the whole of the covenant comes by way of the Jews and that Ephraim, the remnant and mixed seed of Israel in the form of the Kingdom of Ephraim, is not to play any significant part in the fulfilling of the Covenant of Abraham. In short it is ALL of the Jews. Now to date, particularly in the LDS Church, it has been offered that Jesus is a Jew, at least by his blood line, and in that salvation has and does come by way of the Jews. Yet the 'Zionistic' movements of the Latter-days does maintain that Ephraim is to play the prime role of fulfilling the Covenant of Abraham by taking the gospel, the 'restored gospel' from the LDS perspective, to the nations of the earth, every kindred, tongue and people. This 'Zionist' movements of the 'Christian Modern West' is totally discounted and referred to as the 'Ephraimite Error', which so groups all such 'Zionistic' movements which so sets form Ephraim, the remnant thereof, as filling that signicant role of ministering the gospel of Christ to all the world.

Now the irony is that the Jews who so present that 'The Covenant' is not to be split between Ephraim and Judah, but is that right of one tribe alone by their right of being the legal and proper heir of 'The Covenant' birthright is likely the most properly correct view of the matter. What is not the most properly correct perspective of the singularly united 'Covenat of Abraham' in but one tribe, the tribe of inheritance, is that that tribe is the tribe of Judah. Judah so claims that 'right' not by proper inheritance but by their touted position that it they and only they who have so 'prevailed' in Israel above all their brother. This position is but from the 'Jewish perspective' which is transcribed in some particulars in the Jewish compiled Old Testament, but what is the more doctrinally correct and scripturely acceptable is the 'birthright' of the Covenant belonged to Joseph, and to he whom Jacob named 'Israel' to so stand in the place of his first born son Reuben in that covenant right of being the proper heir of the covenant, the whole covenant, including the legal right ancestry of the Messiah as so being presented in this current text, even that Messiah ben Ephraim/Joseph by whom the covenant promises of the fathers have and do remain in all things and in the whole of the covenant including the covenant ancestry of the Messiah in the Legal right of the Law of Moses though Joseph (D&C 27:10). That is Obed stood as the legal and righful heir of the covenant, having been raised up to the dead house of Mahlon and his father Elimelch, Ephrathites or Ephraimites of that town of the tomb of their mother Rachel who also so prophecied it to be such.

Reconciling 'Two Covenant Israel'?

Is there but one Covenant of God, or has he made two covenants? Has he divided the covenant between two tribes or sons of Jacob? Messianic Jews state that there is not 'two covenants', one with Judah and one with Ephraim, and they limit the one covenant unto the Jews. Now they may will be correct in that there is but one covenant and one covenant Israel and that the covenant is not divided into two. But what might surprise them is that the singular covenant has always been in and of Ephraim. This entire paper rest upon that fact that God made but one covnenant unto the children of men and that this covenant came down through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph and Ephraim, Judah's role in it is but by the surrogate parentage of Obed by Boaz as he did raise up a son and heir of the house of Mahlon and Elimelech, Ephraimites and kinsmen by maternal relationship.

What is of interest is that the Traditional Christian teachings of a 'Jewish Messiah' so prevails that even various authorities of the LDS faith have spoken of the 'split' covenant, the ancestry of Christ to the Jews and the covenant of the restoration and of Abraham to Ephraim. But was that covenant so divided. 'We have learned', states Joseph Fielding Smith, though the logic defies that learning. Often in the LDS faith we adhere to the Traditional Christian perspective as to maintain a 'standard' acceptable Christian front. But when our 'learning' is of the Traditional Christianity school, will we not correct our error when presented with the truth of the matter? The premise of this text is that there is but One Christ/Messiah, One Covenant and one linage through whom the nations of the earth are blessed. And that one is in Ephraim, even King David being an Ephrathite or Ephraimite of the tribe of Ephraim preserved as such by the surogate fatherhood of Boaz in raising up seed to the dead Ephraimite house of Mahloh and Elimelech. In short there is but 'One Covenant Israel', which through the vexation of the ursuption of Judah and the consequencial envy of Ephraim has appeared to be divided but that it is not.

The Dividing of the Covenant

There was alway to be but One Messiah and One Messiah only. He was known by the learned as well as the faithful that he would be a descendant of Joseph of Egypt, Joseph being the bearer of the covenant, being the 'firstborn' (1 Chronicles 5:2). And he also became to be known that he would a descendant of King David, King David being heir to the Covenant of the firstborn as his grandfather Obed was the rightful heir of the Covenant of Joseph through Ephraim and that Ephraimite family unto whom Boaz acted a surrogate parent in order to raise up seed unto the dead house of Mahlon and Elimelech. Thus the descendt as stated in D&C 113 from Jesse as well as from Joseph is the same lineal decent, it is the same patriarchal linage of the covenant from father to son, Mahlon being the rightful father of Obed, as Obed was raised up to be the son of Mahlon in the House of Elimelech/Naomi.

This was known and so prophesied as it was Philip who stated to Nathanael to come and see 'the Son of Joseph' as prophecied and written by Moses that he would be 'Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph' (John 1:45). The later 'son of Joseph' here meaning Joseph of Egypt. Thus it was known and written in the scriptures of the days of Jesus and was not altered until after that time of Christ. Even the Pharisees of Jesus knew that could 'well' insult him by correctly pointing out his same type of linage from Ephraim as that of the mixed seed of Ephraim among the Samaritans as so referred in this item and others. And thus it was when they would question, 'Is not this Joseph's son?', it could and would have different conotations depending upon one's point of reference. Was he the son of Joseph the Carpenter or not? Was he that promised Messiah and son of Joseph of Egypt? And being the Son of God, how could he be accounted as being the son of a man though he was the Son of Man?

Now it was to this end and purpose that the Jews did divide or split the covenant themselves, imagining unto themselves two Messsiahs, one of Joseph and one of David. And thus they also divided the ancestry into being two separate ancestries, one sigularly of Joseph through Ephraim and the other singularly of Judah through Boaz. And they completely disgarded any consideration that under the Law of God, Obed was not the son and heir of Boaz. This was the perspective of the Jew, they usurping to having 'prevailed over their brethren', particularly over Ephraim who is Isarel of the Covenant. Yet their own traditions if not also scriptural writings, now lost, did prescibe the Messiah as Messiah ben Joseph/Ephraim, as well as Messiah ben David in a singular lineal way. So to strip Joseph and Ephraim completely from that grand birthright of the Covenant of Abraham, they did imagine unto themselves two separate Messiahs, one of Joseph and one separately of David the Jew. And to the Messiah ben Joseph they attributed but the seemingly lesser attributes of man such as suffering and dying. But unto their Messiah ben David they did attribute all that was glorious and of God.

So thus they were first to divide or split the covenant between Joseph and Judah, holding the greater to Judah. And yet they do not allow to split the covenant unto Ephraim/Joseph in the least of performances today, that day when they yet say Messiah ben Ephraim/Joseph will come, as to them he has not come already. And thus their whole argument in their so structured 'Ephraimite Error' begins to crumble under their own selectivity of so 'dividing or spliting of the covenant', which they of themselves have already done. The irony is this, neither is that covenant split or divided. At best it may be views as being shared, by the blood line of Judah through Boaz and the God's Law inheritance of Obed as being that son raised up to the dead Mahlon and Elimelech, thus preserving and heir of the covenant of the fathers which was preserved through Joseph (D&C 27:10).

A House Divided Which Is Actually United

Their is but one House of Israel, there is not a House of Judah and a House of Ephraim separated from each other, though men tend to make it such. The name of Israel is given to mean 'he who does prevail in or with the Lord'. That name was given unto Jacob when Jacob wrestled with the Lord and did so prevail in securing the covenant blessings unto himself an his seed after him. In a parental sense all who have descended of Jacob may consider themself as the House of Israel of Jacob. But the name Israel was not a new name only first known unto Israel, it was a concept and name so given from the foundation, and it was first associated with those who 'kept their first estate' and did prevail in the Lord in that respect. Thus in concept the name Israel is and my be applied to all those who have come unto the Lord and so prevailed in the living and kepting that which the Lord does prescribe for them to adhere unto.

Now as to the specific name of Israel being that name by which one may associate the Covenant of God with, that who so come unto God and keeps his commandments are they who are his people and have therefor prevailed in the Lord to be the people of the Lord there is two perspectives. One is the general perspective which includes all who have come unto God, joined with his gosepl and prevailed in the keeping of his commandments. The other perspective of Israel is the name given to those who do bear the responsibilty of bring forth the directives, blessings and ordianance of the covenant unto eternal life. That Name of the Covenant Bearer was given to Jacob and Jacob in turn placed that name and blessing upon the son of Joseph, Joseph being the rightful heir of the birthright covenant, upon Ephraim, who Jacob placed in the stead of his firstborn son Reuben and so named Ephraim Israel. And thus when the kingdoms of united Israel divided due to the unrighteous dominion being exercised by Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, Israel, those of Ephraim, said 'Amen' unto the power and position of Rehoboam over them and they departed and established their own Kingdom of Israel, calling after the name of Jacob and Ephraim, distinguishing themselves as 'The Kingdom of Israel' and they appointed Jeroboam to be their king whom God by the word of the prophet Nathan had set forth to be the true King of the Kingdom of Israel.

Now this marked the actual physical division of the tribes of Israel, the sons of Jacob. But that split was foreshadowed in its coming from the days that Judah vexed Joseph in his attempt to usurp the position of the firstborn and heir of Jacob. Now it seems that with the presumed death of Joseph, Jacob had looked to Benjamin to be his heir for a time. And perhaps in respect to this commitment, Saul the Benjaminite was anointed to be the first King of United Israel. With Saul's failures and with the wedge of feelings of Judah toward Ephraim/Israel of still wanting to be party to the Covenat of Abraham as the family leader, the Lord had set in motion a situation in which Judah might so claim and fulfill its intention to usurp that dignitity unto itself. And this they found in David, who was of blood line linage from Judah, Boaz being the performing Kinsman husband unto Ruth who brought forth Obed. And in Obed was the dual blessings of Eprath and Judah, of Ephraim and Judah, of Rachel and Leah as so pronouced by the towns people upon Obed in Ruth chapter 4.

"And all the people that were in the gate, and the elders, said, We are witness. The LORD make the woman that is come into thy house be like the house like Rachel and like Leah, which tow did build the house of Israel: and do thou worthily in Ephratah, and be famous in Bethlehem: ... And the women said unto Naomi, Blessed be the LORD, which hath not left thee this day without a kinsman, that his name many be famous in Israel. ... And the women her neighbors gave it a name, saying, There is a son born to Naomi; and they called his name Obed: he is the father of Jesse, the father of David." ~ Ruth 4:11, 14, 17

Now the dualism is herein echoed, or Rachel and of Leah, Joseph and Judah, Ephratah (Ephraim) and Bethlehem (Judah). Obed being of the blood line of Judah of Tamar's son Pharez and of the adoption unto being raised up as the heir of the dead house of Mahlon and Elimelech, Ephraimites, of whom Naomi was the living representative and whose son Obed was so recognized to have in right of law and ancestry to have been. And thus here in this linage Judah could ursurp by blood, which Judah has done and still does, while the legality of right belongs to Ephraim and on via the heir of the covenant, Obed of the House of Mahlon and Elimelech. And though the Jews have obsured this fact in their ephasis of the blood line ancestry, accoring to the rightful ancestry according to the Law of God, Jesse was an Ephrathite (Ephraimite) and so was Daivd, the House of David in whom Israel held the greater right, even down to that Ephrathite, Jesus Christ, whom the Pharisees said 'well' of that he thus accordingly could be said to be a Samaritan, even that Good Samaritan of which Jesus did preach and imply himself to be.

And this is the coming togehter of the witness/stick of Joseph/Ephraim and that witness/stick of Judah which does and will work to the uniting of kingdoms of Israel into one, not only of one history but of one people under one Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. And this Ezekiel 37 points dramatically to, the union of Ephraim and Judah, that is the Kingdom of Israel with the Kingdom of Judah, it to being but one having but one Lord, Messiah, Christ, Redeemer and Savior.

The Envy of Ephraim Swallowed Up in the Ephraimite Messiah

Though currently not for general public understanding nor formal prophetic publication as being currently understood doctrine, due to the Jewish dimonstated anymosity toward Ephraim—that same great parallel stumbling block of their acceptance of Jesus Christ as the dualistic Messiah—in its proper time it will become published revealed doctrine that Jesus Christ is rightfully and legally the son, seed and heir of Ephraim and the everlasting covenant via that source. With the Jews still so set upon their expressing their hatred of Ephraim/Israel, and their coveting of the heir to the covenant and the Messiah linage, they are not ready to accept that Jesus the one true Messiah is of Ephraim, he being that Jesus Christ of the New Testament, 'the' one and only Messiah of the covenant, and that by his right in Ephraim. Indeed, Israel was correct in their claim that they held the greater 'right' in David, dispite his blood linage from Boaz the Jew.

The totally envy of Ephraim toward Judah's position of claim to the covenant and the Messiah, will be null and void when it has become generally and dulling published by prophetic revealtion to the world, the in fact the whole of the Covenant has and does but come though Joseph and his son Ephraim with the assistance of his other son Manessah. There is nothing left to envy when one finds out that that which he have been envying of another has in reallity been his and his alone all of the time anyway. And when it is so established by the proclamation of God, Judah will no long be enable to vex Ephraim in so claiming of himself that covenant right unto Judah when he has to fully acknowledge that it has not been his at all in legal right, but has always been that of Ephraim. The vexation of Judah removed and the envy of Ephraim removed in the singular understanding that accourding to the Law of God the covenant birthright of the everlasting covenant has been that of Ephraim/Joseph all along and of no one else, though by the providing of Jewish blood line Christ through the surrogate performing Boaz unto Mahlon, raising up seed unto the Ephraimite house of Elimelech, the heirs of the covenant, namely; Obed, Jesse, David and so forth even down to Christ as will as to Joseph Smith though their 'sinular' linage line where Joseph is the rightful ancestor to Jesse in the covenant, who is also the rightful ancestor to both Jesus and Joseph Smith, pure Ephraimites of the covenant all.