The Case Stated
In our former works we have shown that as descendants of Joseph, son of
Jacob, the people of these United States of America have for a portion
of their inheritance a part in the oath-bound covenant made by Jehovah
with Abraham. The lawful heir to the covenant promises and blessings
which belonged distinctively to the inheritor of the family birthright
must necessarily be a first-born. Joseph fulfilled this condition since
he was the firstborn son of Jacob, and Rachel and because of the
delinquency of Reuben (the first-born of Jacob, and Leah) inherited the
family birthright. Just here it is important to state that the words
first-born, birthright, first fruits, and firstling are translated from
the same original Hebrew word and the firstling of the herd or flock
(that which openeth the matrix among cattle, sheep, horses, etc.)
belonged to the Lord as well as the first fruits of the harvest, of
vineyard, and field.
By the law of primogeniture the first-born son was the lawful
inheritor of certain properties, blessings, and indisputable rights, of
which he could not be deprived except by sale, by the commission of
crime, or by death. Esau sold his birthright; that is, he sold that
which was his by right of birth as the firstborn or birthright son of
Isaac and Rebeccah; Reuben the first-born of Jacob, and Leah forfeited
his birthright by the commission of crime; but Joseph, the first-born of
Jacob, and Rachel neither sold nor forfeited his birthright.
Consequently it is written, "But the
birthright was Joseph's"
In the King James version (I Chron. 5:2) the word was
is in italics which shows it is interpolated by the translators for the
omitted verb, but from the context, the historic facts, and also the
prophecies concerning the birthright, we know that the interpolated word
should be in the present tense and not in the past, as used in the
authorized version. Substituting then is
for was and comes
for the interpolated word came
we have the following: "He
[Reuben] was the first-born of Israel; but,
forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed [See Gen.
35:22], his birthright was given unto the
sons of Joseph, the son of Israel: and the genealogy [of
Reuben] is not to be reckoned after the
birthright. For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him comes the
chief ruler [Margin, "or prince"]; but
the birthright is Joseph's." Because Judah is the
progenitor of the royal line, he must also be the racial father of the
Messiah. It is therefore recorded in the New
Testament: "Our Lord sprang out of Juda."
As we are now dealing especially with the birthright, we must call
attention to the fact that we have both the statement that the
birthright of Reuben was given to the sons of Joseph and that the
birthright is Joseph's. While this fact is never again restated in these
same words, the Scriptures, both in history and in the prophecies, when
referring to the national and racial birthright facts pertaining to
Israel, use either the name of Joseph alone, or the name of one or both
of his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh. For example, we find in Gen.
48:20 the following: "In thee shall
Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh,"
and again in Deut. 33:16, 17: "Let the
blessing come upon the head of Joseph ... His glory is like the
firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns:
with them he shall push and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim and
they are the thousands of Manasseh."
Reference is again made to Ephraim and Manasseh. seven hundred and
twenty-five years after this last quoted prophecy was written, more than
two hundred years after the division of the seed of Jacob-Israel into
two kingdoms, and five years before the ten tribes were carried out of
their land - Samaria - by Shalmaneser the King of Assyria into the head
waters of the Euphrates. At this time, during the first year of the
reign of Hezekiah, after he had destroyed the altars of idolatry in
Judea, it is written that Hezekiah, sent letters to Judah "and
wrote letters also to Ephraim and Manasseh. that they should come to the
house of the Lord at Jerusalem {the capital of Judah} to
keep the passover unto the Lord God of Israel" (II
Chron. 30: 1). Judah here stands, as it ever does, as the
representative name of the Jews, while the names of Ephraim and
Manasseh, the joint holders of the national birthright of the Abrahamic
race, stand for the ten tribes - the kingdom of Israel.
Concerning these two birthright sons, it is further written (Joshua
17:14, 17): "And the children of Joseph
spake unto Joshua, saying, Why hast thou given me but one lot and one
portion to inherit, seeing I am a great people, forasmuch as the Lord
hath blessed me hitherto? And Joshua spake unto the house of Joseph even
to Ephraim and to Manasseh, saying, Thou are a great people, and hast
great power: thou shalt not have one lot only."
It is remarkable that the word "great"
as herein used in relation to the two tribes of the birthright house, is
never used in holy writ concerning any of the other tribes of Israel;
that Ephraim is universally denominated "Great Britain," and
that to-day Manasseh. the United States of America is now
spoken of among the nations of the world as "A great people,"
and "A great nation."
The names Ephraim and Manasseh are used interchangeably with the name
Israel, all Israel, the kingdom of Israel, etc., because they as the
birthright holders are to develop into the multiplicity of seed which
was promised to Abraham in the oath-bound covenant and when the division
into two kingdoms took place the birthright house was one of these
kingdoms and the royal line of Judah the other. Thus, the two houses are
dealt with separately in the history and prophecies of the Old Testament
Scriptures. So much for the use of the two
names of the birthright sons of Joseph as the representatives of the ten
tribes or the birthright nation.
The following passage illustrates the use of the name of one of the
birthright sons of Joseph "I am a
father to Israel, and Ephraim is my first-born
[birthright]. Hear the word of the Lord, O
ye nations [the nations of Israel], and
declare it in the isles afar off [where the birthright
house of Israel are] and say, He that
scattered Israel will gather him and keep him, as a shepherd doth his
flock. For the LORD hath redeemed Jacob" (Jer.
3:9-11). Notice in this quotation that the names Israel, Ephraim and
Jacob are used as a synonym of the kingdom or house of Israel (of which
Judah is in no sense a part). But the same writer in the same chapter
continues: "I have surely heard Ephraim
bemoaning himself, thus: Thou [God] hast
chastised me, and I was chastised, as a bullock,
[insignia of the house of Joseph-Israel] unaccustomed
to the yoke: turn thou me, and I shall be turned [back to
God]; for thou art the Lord my God. Surely
after that I was turned, I repented; and after that I was instructed, I
smote upon my thigh [like Jacob 's and as with him this
was the symbol of human submission to the divine.]."
In some cases the name Joseph represents the ten tribes in
contradistinction to Judah: for example, "I
will strengthen the house of Judah and I will save the house of Joseph
and I will bring them again to place them ... And they of Ephraim shall
be like a mighty man" (Zech. 10:6, 7). Here we find
that these names of the birthright family are used as representative
names of the Israel of history and prophecy. It is the failure of
Biblical teachers and students to note this fact which has caused both
the Christian and the secular world to connect the name Israel
exclusively with the Jews and to consider only the Jews as the Israel of
history and prophecy, and to ignore Joseph, Ephraim, and Manasseh as
having a separate and distinctive national and racial importance
independent of the Jews - of Jewish Israel.
Elsewhere we have dealt more exhaustively with these two separate and
separated peoples. Now it is our purpose to deal with Manasseh, not only
joint heir in the national birthright with his brother, but also sole
heir to the birthright which came to him as Joseph's first-born. As such
he has inherited rights, blessings and promises, which in no sense is
shared by his brother, Ephraim, who has been placed before him only in
their joint inheritance of the national birthright of the Abrahamic
covenant.
For the benefit of those who are not familiar with our other writings
in which we have explained, although briefly, that Manasseh has a double
inheritance, we will herein give Biblical proofs that as the firstborn
he holds the birthright to those blessings, promises, and heritages
which belonged to his father, Joseph. Before dying Jacob, the then
indisputable holder of the national birthright transferred the Abrahamic
racial birthright to the family of Joseph through his two sons, as
recorded in Gen. 48:15-18: "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, The Angel
which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads; and let my name
(Israel) 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. And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right
hand upon the head of Ephraim it displeased him [Margin:
"was evil in his eyes"]: and he
held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head to
Manasseh's head. And Joseph said unto his father, Not so my father: for
this is the firstborn" We have previously dealt so
fully with the national birthright, which was given to these two
"lads" that we have used here only as much of the Scripture as
was necessary to bring out the fact that Manasseh is not only a joint
inheritor of the Abrahamic birthright but that he is also Joseph's
firstborn, inheritor of the family birthright, and, like his father, he
has a double-portion. One portion of this he inherited as his father's
first-born and the other was divinely bestowed. His double-portion came
to him as to his father, i.e., one part by the natural law of
primogeniture and one part from the God of his fathers, the God of
Israel. Both portions so far as Manasseh. is concerned, are indicated in
the above quotation, first when he is made joint heir in the racial
birthright with his brother Ephraim and secondly when he is spoken of as
the first-born of Joseph.
Both the double-portion of Joseph and that of Manasseh. seem to have
a double significance, an earthly and a heavenly or a carnal and a
spiritual. For there are some things in the life of Joseph which were
typical of those of our Lord. Joseph was the second first-born in the
house of his father. Christ Jesus the second Adam is the "first
born among many brethren" (Rom. 8:29), but both he
and Joseph were the first-born of their mother. Christ is the "firstborn
of every creature" (Col. 1: 15), Joseph is the
firstborn, the birthright holder of God's chosen race. Joseph was
persecuted by his brethren, so was the Lord Jesus. Joseph was sold by
his brethren, so was our Lord. Joseph's brethren were brought into deep
sorrow because of their treatment of him, the brethren of Jesus must yet
mourn in great bitterness for him whom they pierced. Joseph saved his
people from famine, - from physical death. Our Lord's name was called
Jesus "for he shall save his people
from their sins" (Matt. 1:2 1) - from death. Joseph
gave his brethren gifts of corn and provision and gold. Jesus gives his
brethren the bread of life and gold tried in the fire. Finally there
came a time when the brethren of Joseph were terrified at the revelation
of himself to them, but it ended in peace and joy, and there will come a
time when the Redeemer of Judah will be revealed to them, and they too
will be terrified, but all will end with peace and joy.
Again, Joseph ascended to the rulership of Egypt at the time when he
was the greatest man in all Egypt except the king on his throne. At this
time he was ruler over all his brethren - his nation. This rulership we
read, was previously foretold in his God-given, stellar dream, in which
typically, his father, mother and brethren were made to bow down to him.
Christ also the rejected shall yet rule over the world, of which Egypt
was a type. At this time the individual house of Joseph shall be as its
progenitor was, next to the throne, with the one on the throne alone
superior in authority to that of the exalted house of Joseph.
Furthermore, while so far as the national birthright of Israel is
concerned, Ephraim was set before Manasseh, that is, at the transfer of
the national birthright the first was made last and the last was made
first, yet when it was declared that the seed of Ephraim should be
greater than the seed of Manasseh, there is not the slightest hint that
the greatness thereof should be along any other line or in any other
possible sense, than in the one thing involved, i.e., great in number -
in multiplicity - the ten thousands of Ephraim being compared with the
thousands of Manasseh. Although Manasseh was an equal heir with Ephraim
in the national birthright there is not the slightest intimation that
that in any sense lessened or invalidated the glory, exaltation or
blessedness of the individual birthright held by Manasseh as his
father's inheritor, nor that that honour should in any sense be shared
by his brother Ephraim. Ephraim's honours were purely national, those of
Manasseh were both national and ancestral. Ephraim's portion was single,
Manasseh's double, one by inheritance and the other divinely bestowed.
There is in the divine economy a law of reversal in which the first
became last and the last first. Ishmael was Abraham's first son, Isaac
was his last, but by this law of reversal Ishmael the first became last
and Isaac the last became first. Esau the first-born of twins sold his
birthright and became the last, while Jacob the last-born of these
first-borns became the first. Reuben also was the first-born of Jacob
and Leah, of whom Jacob said, "Thou art
my might, the beginning of my strength, the excellency of my dignity and
power." But Reuben the first first-born went down
and Joseph the last first-born of Jacob (but the first-born of his first
love), was placed first and made the inheritor of the national and
racial birthright. Also in Joseph's case there is a double reversal, for
his mother Rachel was the first love of Jacob, but as a wife came last,
and for whom he served the first seven years, but whom he did not get
until he had served another seven years. This double reversal may be the
foundation or basic law for Joseph's double-portion.
There is also a parallel or witnessing truth to this first becoming
last and its consequent law of reversal, in the statement: "First
that which is natural and afterward that which is spiritual."
Ishmael was wholly natural, - of the flesh only - and was the result of
an attempt in the flesh on the part of Sarah and Abraham to bring about
that which God had promised to accomplish supernaturally, but Isaac was
the child of promise - the spiritual. Esau was wholly natural, earthly,
carnal, but Jacob who at first was also all that Esau was, became
Israel, i.e., the one who as a prince had prevailed with God - the
spiritual. Reuben also, corrupted himself, dishonoured his father's bed,
and lost the opportunity to reach his possible best. Joseph the reverse
of all this, resisted all temptation to be corrupted, loved and forgave
his enemies and persecutors, was faithful even in prison, and said to
his repenting brethren "Ye thought evil
against me; but God meant it unto good." Reuben the
first was natural, Joseph who afterward succeeded him was spiritual.
All of these were but the foreshadowing of the two, double-portions
of the house of Joseph. The first double-portion was the giving of the
national and racial birthright to "the two sons of Joseph"
instead of to but one. The second double-portion was the inheritance of
both the national and family birthrights by the first-born of the family
of Joseph-Manasseh.
Now, the very fact that Manasseh was the first-born of Joseph was
made last in the national birthright is a prophecy that in the full
fruition of his family birthright he shall yet be placed in his rightful
place as first - not first in regard to the greatest number of
posterity, of the multiplicity of seed, or of becoming the company of
nations - no, that is forever settled upon Ephraim. According to the
last census Great Britain had over four hundred million subjects in her
company of nations, while the population of the United States of America
had only one hundred and five million. In regard to number it must ever
be the ten thousands of Ephraim and the thousands of Manasseh. But that
in which Manasseh is due to become first is in the one thing which made
his father first - his spirituality. Because of that he was first in
power, influence, ideals, and God-blessedness in the land of Egypt, and
for that reason it is written: "And the
Lord prospered everything that Joseph did."
Manasseh is now coming into his own as the rightful first-born of his
family as the one exalted, righteous, representative nation of his godly
father who in the national birthright was made last that, according to
the law of divine reversal, he might be made first. Hence the
descendants of Joseph through his first-born son, who inherited the
birthright shall be recognized ethically as leading the world, before
whom his national brethren shall bow down, as their progenitors did
before his father when he sat on the throne of Egypt.
Again, Manasseh was placed last in his tribal relations to the race
that by the very law of reversal he might eventually be recognized as
the one, single, individual first-born tribe; and, as such, take his
place as first in moral influence and power among his brother nations.
Hence the thirteenth tribe as the last becomes the first, as a
world-wide power in the propagation of lofty ideals, of questions of
right and wrong, of justice and righteousness, as the spokesman for God,
to whom the world gives heed, as also it did to Joseph in Egypt.
"But," questions one, "how is it that Manasseh having
been made the last can now rise to the first place, since it is true
that neither Ishmael, Esau, nor Reuben did or could rise again to the
first after having once been made last?" Our reply to this query
is, that in each of these cases there was only one portion - only one
birthright, while in the case of Manasseh there was the double-portion -
the double birthright, and since his birthright was unforfeited and
unsold he was the unimpeachable heir of his father's house, and though
he was placed last in the national birthright, it is his due, his
inalienable right; now to rise to the fulness of the birthright which is
his as his father's first-born, which cannot be affected by the interest
in the national birthright shared by his younger brother. Thus there is
a reversal to the first order in the case of Manasseh which was not
possible in the previous cases. Here is where the double-portion counts,
the first not only becoming last but that same last becomes first. And
since the inheritance which came first to this double birthright holder
was purely natural, we may expect him in fulness of the later
inheritance to find in connection with those natural things, by that
other law of reversal, the better things, the greater things, the things
that are purely spiritual.
