Jump to content

Ephraim and Gathering Other Tribes


Recommended Posts

Obviously as members of the Church we are gathering scattered Israel in these latter-days and i'm given to understand that the tribe of Ephraim is the primary gatherer. What though would preclude someone from another tribe gathering others to Christ? I had a Bishop years ago who was Jewish and I don't know but i'd say he probably wasn't from Ephraim and I know a brother in our Stake who is from Dan. Both of whom served as Bishops. What would make Ephraim more special than other tribes if we all are charged to do the same thing?

Link to post
29 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Pretty much.  From The Encyclopedia of Mormonism (under "Ephraim") :

And here (under "Patriarchal Blessings) :

And from the Guide to the Scriptures (under "Ephraim") :

And here (under "Israel") :

Interesting stuff.

Nothing that I can see.  I think the Tribe of Ephraim has the primary responsibility, but not necessarily the exclusive responsibility. 

Per the above article, "Ephraim will have a leadership role..."

The office of bishop is sort of special per D&C 107:76, which provides that "a literal descendant of Aaron has a legal right to the presidency of this priesthood, to the keys of this ministry, to act in the office of bishop independently, without counselors, except in a case where a President of the High Priesthood, after the order of Melchizedek, is tried, to sit as a judge in Israel."

Aaron was of the tribe of Levi, not Ephraim.

Brad Wilcox states that "{d}escendants from all tribes will bring unique gifts and strengths to the table," and that "{e}veryone will be needed as we strive to move this work forward."  As I understand it, most of the particular duties of the other tribes have not yet been revealed (see, e.g., here).  I anticipate this will change as time goes on.

Thanks,

-Smac

This great! Thank you!!!

  • Like 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, Duncan said:

. What would make Ephraim more special than other tribes

Nothing makes Ephraim more special than others;  Ephraim just has a different role at times and shares at other times. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
8 minutes ago, Calm said:
Quote

What would make Ephraim more special than other tribes.

Nothing makes Ephraim more special than others;  Ephraim just has a different role at times and shares at other times. 

In the grand scheme of things, Calm is right.

However, Ephraim is somewhat unique in that it has the "birthright."

Here:

Quote

According to the Bible, when Joseph brought his two sons to his father, Jacob, for a blessing, Ephraim received the birthright blessing in place of Manasseh {the elder son} (Gen. 48:13-20), one of the departures noted in the Bible from the custom of bestowing on the firstborn son the special privileges that belonged to him by right of primogeniture. The Lord continued to acknowledge Ephraim's blessing centuries later when he said, "I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" (Jer. 31:9; cf. 1 Chr. 5:1-2). Ephraim's descendants will continue in significant roles.

Here:

Quote

Ephraim was given the birthright in Israel (1 Chr. 5:1–2; Jer. 31:9). In the last days their privilege and responsibility is to bear the priesthood, take the message of the restored gospel to the world, and raise an ensign to gather scattered Israel (Isa. 11:12–13; 2 Ne. 21:12–13). The children of Ephraim will crown with glory those from the north countries who return in the last days (D&C 133:26–34).

Here:

Quote

The blessings and duties of Ephraim have been given more detail in these latter days, because that is the tribe we find most prominently participating in the restored covenants. Elder Eldred G. Smith, the patriarch to the Church, explained “Joseph {son of Israel and father of Ephraim} received a special blessing which we are most interested in because we are his descendants, the most part of us, and the blessings of the gospel have come through this line, for Joseph Smith, Senior, was a true descendant, through Ephraim, the younger son of Joseph” (General Conference, April 1952). Ephraim has been tasked with gathering in these last days (Deuteronomy 33:17, see 13-17), so it’s not surprising to see him receive the covenant blessings first (almost like a birthright (see 1 Chron. 5:1-2 and Gen. 48:17-20)).

And here:

Quote

Reuben, Jacob’s eldest son, had the birthright—the double portion—so it stands to reason that instead of one tribe, Reuben should have had two. However, Reuben also had something else: a morality problem. In fact, he committed adultery with one of his father’s wives—Bilhah (see Genesis 35:22). Because of his disobedience, Reuben was left with only one tribe like the rest of his brothers. The birthright, including the additional tribe, was passed not to Simeon (which would have been the case had Jacob had only one wife) but to Joseph, the firstborn of Jacob’s second wife (see 1 Chronicles 5:1).

Most people assume Joseph received the coat of many colors because he was his father’s favorite. However, President Russell M. Nelson clarified:

The birthright went to Joseph. That’s why he was given the coat of many colors. It wasn’t because he was a favorite son, necessarily. It was because he was the birthright son. The coat carried that special designation.

Of interest to Latter-day Saints is the fact that the coat may not have been something worn over clothing but under clothing. The word translated as coat could actually have been referring to “an inner garment next [to] the skin (Leviticus 16:4); also worn by women . . . ; generally with sleeves, coming down to the knees.”

With the birthright, Joseph had the responsibility to care for his extended family, which he did, ultimately saving them from famine and death (see 1 Nephi 5:14). He also was expected to govern the affairs of his father’s estate, which he did, along with governing all of Egypt. Joseph married Asenath and had two sons: Manasseh, born first, and Ephraim, born second (see Genesis 41:45, 50–52; 46:20). 

Later, in Genesis 48, we read that Jacob adopted Joseph’s sons so they would be on equal footing with the other heads of tribes. Jacob adopted Ephraim first and Manasseh second (see Genesis 48:20; Doctrine & Covenants 133:34). President Joseph Fielding Smith taught: 

It was Levi and Joseph who were not numbered as tribes in Israel. Joseph received a double portion through his sons, each inheriting [a tribe] through their adoption by their grandfather.

Since Ephraim was adopted before Manasseh, he and his descendants became heirs to the birthright. However, Ephraim was never alone in receiving those blessings and responsibilities. We read in 1 Chronicles 5:1 that Reuben’s “birthright was given unto the sons [plural] of Joseph.” President Joseph Fielding Smith confirmed, “The birthright was given to the sons of Joseph. . . . Ephraim was not substituted as a tribe for Reuben.” On another occasion President Smith wrote, “The remnants of Joseph, found among [Manasseh], . . . have part in this great work.” Similarly, President Spencer W. Kimball taught that the descendants of both Ephraim and Manasseh are “chosen people.”

This last link, an article by Brad Wilcox, is well worth a read in its entirety.

Different individuals and groups will have different responsibilities.  In the end, though, "all are alike unto God."  (2 Nephi 26:33)  

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97
  • Like 3
Link to post

Wouldn't the same arguments used to defend the lack of DNA evidence for Lamanites  also apply to actually identifying any descendants of the lost ten tribes?

From the church DNA essay.

Quote

The difficulties do not end with the founder effect. Even if it were known with a high degree of certainty that the emigrants described in the Book of Mormon had what might be considered typically Near Eastern DNA, it is quite possible that their DNA markers did not survive the intervening centuries. Principles well known to scientists, including population bottleneck and genetic drift, often lead to the loss of genetic markers or make those markers nearly impossible to detect.

 

Link to post
5 hours ago, Duncan said:

Obviously as members of the Church we are gathering scattered Israel in these latter-days and i'm given to understand that the tribe of Ephraim is the primary gatherer. What though would preclude someone from another tribe gathering others to Christ? I had a Bishop years ago who was Jewish and I don't know but i'd say he probably wasn't from Ephraim and I know a brother in our Stake who is from Dan. Both of whom served as Bishops. What would make Ephraim more special than other tribes if we all are charged to do the same thing?

In recent decades, as our missionaries have served in Eastern Europe and Eurasia, etc., patriarchs assigned to those broad areas have been giving blessings which include virtually all the other tribes, and I would imagine that your Jewish bishop rec'd a patriarchal blessing with a lineage of Judah or Benjamin (the two main Jewish tribes), or even of Levi, if he was a priest (Levite or cohen) assigned to the Jews.

Remember, Jesus himself was a Judahite, and Paul the Apostle was a Benjaminite.

Edited by Robert F. Smith
  • Like 2
Link to post
4 hours ago, smac97 said:

...........From The Encyclopedia of Mormonism (under "Ephraim") :

Quote

............The keys of gathering Israel were committed to the Prophet Joseph Smith by Moses on April 3, 1836, in the Kirtland Temple (D&C 110:11)....................

....................................

Exercising those keys, Joseph sent his apostle Orson Hyde to the Holy Land to dedicate it to the final gathering of the Jews and the building of their temple in Old Jerusalem.  Thus, in 1841 Hyde arrived in Jerusalem and did just that on the Mount of Olives, where the Orson Hyde Garden now celebrates that event with the full text of his dedicatory prayer in both Hebrew and English.  There are now over 6.8 million Jews in Israel, and they are still arriving to start new lives free from persecution (the world population of Jews is 14.7 million, although 23.5 million Jews are eligible to immigrate to Israel as "Jews" under the Law of Return, when those with only partial Jewish ancestry are counted; 5.7 million Jews live in the USA).  Israel now has the largest population of Jews of any country.  The Levites and Aaronides among them are currently preparing for service in the new temple -- when it is built.  https://templeinstitute.org/home-page/

Edited by Robert F. Smith
  • Like 1
Link to post
21 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

In recent decades, as our missionaries have served in Eastern Europe and Eurasia, etc., patriarchs assigned to those broad areas have been giving blessings which include virtually all the other tribes, and I would imagine that your Jewish bishop rec'd a patriarchal blessing with a lineage of Judah or Benjamin (the two main Jewish tribes), or even of Levi, if he was a priest (Levite or cohen) assigned to the Jews.

Remember, Jesus himself was a Judahite, and Paul the Apostle was a Benjaminite.

I spoke to a patriarch on my mission in the British Isles and he told me he had given blessings designating people to 10 of the 13 tribes.

  • Like 1
Link to post

I hope that we remember that all of this is theology.

As far as literally what tribe we are in, we are probably in all of them.

All living people of European ancestry are probably descendants of Charlemagne.

https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.theguardian.com/science/commentisfree/2015/may/24/business-genetic-ancestry-charlemagne-adam-rutherford?amp_js_v=a3&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=15955238863200&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From %1%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fscience%2Fcommentisfree%2F2015%2Fmay%2F24%2Fbusiness-genetic-ancestry-charlemagne-adam-rutherford

All of this has happened since the Middle Ages.

The blood of Israel has had a few thousand years more to perpetuate itself, and comes from 12 individuals not one, as in the case of Charlemagne.

Besides being personal prophecy, I believe that patriarchal blessings simply allow us to connect ourselves as part of the blood of Israel and so are extremely valuable for us to make a personal mental and spiritual link with who we are in relation to Israel, but not to be taken literally in anyway.

On the other hand, there is a good chance that your patriarchal blessing is literally correct, but incomplete!

Most of us are probably actually descended from all the possible tribes of Israel, this far forward in history from that origination, so everyone has a little Ephraim a little of this and a little of that in their actual bloodline.

As the article says, 

"But we are all special, which means none of us are. "

Edited by mfbukowski
  • Like 3
Link to post
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

..............................................

"But we are all special, which means none of us are. "

That's the problem with social grading, and of contests in which everyone is a winner.  If everyone is a winner, and everyone gets an A, then the distinction has no meaning.  Have a very merry unbirthday !!

  • Like 2
Link to post
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

"But we are all special, which means none of us are. "

Weird idea.  Like saying none of us are different because all of us are.  Which means we are all special and different.  And yet still some say none of us are.

Link to post
On 7/22/2020 at 9:22 AM, Duncan said:

Obviously as members of the Church we are gathering scattered Israel in these latter-days and i'm given to understand that the tribe of Ephraim is the primary gatherer. What though would preclude someone from another tribe gathering others to Christ? I had a Bishop years ago who was Jewish and I don't know but i'd say he probably wasn't from Ephraim and I know a brother in our Stake who is from Dan. Both of whom served as Bishops. What would make Ephraim more special than other tribes if we all are charged to do the same thing?

I saw on https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bd/ephraim?lang=eng

Ephraim was given the birthright in Israel (1 Chr. 5:1–2; Jer. 31:9)

What are the entitlements of a birthright that Ephraim has that another tribe does not?

Link to post
On 7/22/2020 at 8:48 AM, Calm said:

 

NVM.

Edited by JLHPROF
Link to post

Yes, but special implies better, that is what I am addressing. 
 

Birthright is, imo, in this case more about the assignment of duties rather than any reward for just being born in Ephraim. Just as the double portion of the birthright was intended to be used for the care of others the head of the family was responsible for, cares and responsibilities they inherited. 
 

It is about stewardship, not specialness. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
1 hour ago, TheTanakas said:

I saw on https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bd/ephraim?lang=eng

Ephraim was given the birthright in Israel (1 Chr. 5:1–2; Jer. 31:9)

What are the entitlements of a birthright that Ephraim has that another tribe does not?

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 agreat: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his bseed shall become a cmultitude of dnations.

I suggest you read all of Genesis 48. it's not an entitlement so much as a prophecy.

Link to post
23 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That's the problem with social grading, and of contests in which everyone is a winner.  If everyone is a winner, and everyone gets an A, then the distinction has no meaning.  Have a very merry unbirthday !!

Oh my gosh!! 

Surely thou art a prophet, sir! ;)

 

Link to post
20 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

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 agreat: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his bseed shall become a cmultitude of dnations.

I suggest you read all of Genesis 48. it's not an entitlement so much as a prophecy.

I know that the Levites received the priesthood but what did Ephraim get?

Link to post
6 minutes ago, TheTanakas said:

I know that the Levites received the priesthood but what did Ephraim get?

Ephraim

Fruitful. The second son of Joseph (Gen. 41:52; 46:20); but at the blessing by Jacob, Ephraim was set before Manasseh, the elder son (48:19–20). Joshua belonged to this tribe, and to him was due much of its subsequent greatness. After the settlement in Canaan, the district assigned to the two sons of Joseph included some of the richest land in the country, crossed by several important highways, and having within its limits historic sites like Shechem, Ebal, Gerizim, and Shiloh. Ephraim was notorious for its jealousy of any success gained by any other tribe (Judg. 8:1; 12:1). It was Ephraim’s jealousy of Judah that in great measure brought about the separation of the two kingdoms and that Rehoboam in vain tried to satisfy by going to Shechem to be crowned.

Ephraim was given the birthright in Israel (1 Chr. 5:1–2; Jer. 31:9), and in the last days it has been the tribe of Ephraim’s privilege first to bear the message of the Restoration of the gospel to the world and to gather scattered Israel (Deut. 33:13–17; D&C 64:36; 133:26–34). The time will come when, through the operation of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the envy of Judah and Ephraim shall cease (Isa. 11:12–13).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bd/ephraim?lang=eng

  • Like 1
Link to post
22 hours ago, TheTanakas said:

I saw on https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bd/ephraim?lang=eng

Ephraim was given the birthright in Israel (1 Chr. 5:1–2; Jer. 31:9)

What are the entitlements of a birthright that Ephraim has that another tribe does not?

Birthright

Under the patriarchal order, the right or inheritance of the firstborn is known as birthright. This generally included a land inheritance as well as the authority to preside. The firstborn of flocks and of human families was considered as belonging to the Lord and was expected to be dedicated to Him. This dedication could be either literal or by the payment of redemption money (Ex. 13:11–16).

From time to time certain prerogatives, opportunities, and blessings have attended those who were born of a particular lineage. Thus the office of high priest (of the Aaronic order) and the office of the patriarch to the Church (in the Melchizedek Priesthood) are hereditary in nature. Lineage alone does not guarantee the blessings or spiritual power of the office, but the opportunities are offered to the firstborn of the selected lineage. There are several instances in the scriptures of the one who was the firstborn losing his birthright because of unrighteousness and his office being given to another; such is the case with Esau (Gen. 25:24–34; 27) and Reuben (1 Chr. 5:1–2; Jer. 31:9).

See also Firstborn.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bd/birthright?lang=eng

  • Like 2
Link to post
2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Oh my gosh!! 

Surely thou art a prophet, sir! ;)

 

"...I wish that all the LORD's people were prophets and that the LORD would put his Spirit on them!"

https://biblehub.com/numbers/11-29.htm

Then all the LORD's people would be different from other people who are not prophets.

Link to post
7 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Either that or the Dormouse in a teapot,

90a9fb5161a8d7972ebaa1a7d627da94.jpg

🤣

  • Like 1
Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...