THE EPHRAIM-SCEPTER HERESY, #3
This is the third in a series on this subject. Again, what
some people fantasize or presume the Bible is saying is simply flagrant. When
they deviate from the true context, the Scripture will make a liar out of them
every time. The Ephraim-Scepter heresy is an outrageous undertaking designed
to validate that the Scripture proves that the Redeemer many call "Jesus
Christ" was of the Tribe of Ephraim rather than the Tribe of Judah. They go to
long lengths and twist many passages into pretzels in order to accomplish
their goal. I will again cite a passage that blows their ludicrous surmise
(wild off-the-cuff guess) into oblivion, 1st Kings 12:16:
"So when all [the 10 northern tribes of]
Israel saw that the king [Rehoboam] hearkened not unto them, the people
answered the king, saying, What portion have we in David? neither have we
inheritance in the son of Jesse: to your tents, O Israel: now see to thine own
house, David. So Israel departed unto their tents."
One must comprehend the circumstances to which the above
passage appertains; otherwise one might be sucked into their unmitigated,
warped logic. Therefore, let�s analyze what 1st Kings 12:16 is
saying. Any competent Bible student worth his salt is aware that this chapter
concerns itself with the division of the twelve tribes at the time of
Jeroboam. After the breakaway, the northern kingdom had Ephraim, Manasseh,
Reuben, Simeon, Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, and remaining in
the southern kingdom were Judah and Benjamin, with Levi scattered among all
the tribes. Importantly you will notice, representing Joseph in the north are
both Ephraim and Manasseh among the other eight northern tribes. Inasmuch as
Ephraim was the dominant tribe of the northern Kingdom of Israel, it would
have been illogical for Ephraim to make the statement:
"What portion have we in David? neither have we inheritance in the son
of Jesse", if David and Jesse were of the Tribe
of Ephraim. Under such an erroneous state of affairs Ephraim could only have
said: "Our portion is with David and our inheritance is in the son of
Jesse." Not only are Ephraim and Manasseh sending this message to
Rehoboam, but to the entire ten northern tribes, so we know with confidence
that Jesse and David were indeed not of the Tribe of Ephraim! Here we
have ten witnesses in the ten northern tribes of the House of Israel
(representing millions of people), testifying to that indisputable fact, and
not a single witness in opposition. Conversely, the Ephraim-Scepter people
insist that David and Jesse were of the Tribe of Ephraim! So if you would
rather believe people like Scott Vaught, Buddy Johnson and Russell Walker,
then that�s your problem!
Quoting from a manuscript with many typing errors, by
Walker and Johnson: "You only have to know one thing here to see the
deception of the lying pens of the scribes; that is the fact that this is not
revealed in the genealogy; Salmon [of Ruth 4:20], Boaz, Jesse, and (sic) David
and Christ were all Ephraimites!" Again, all one need do is refer to the
above passage at 1st Kings 12:16 to see this statement that
"Salmon [of Ruth 4:20], Boaz, Jesse, and (sic) David and Christ were all
Ephraimites!" simply IS not true. To add to the confusion, these
two Ephraim-Scepter hucksters attempt to make an issue of John 7:40-44. Before
quoting the passage, they ask an unrelated double question: "Galilaean or
Judean, Israelite or Jew?" They then add: "The great debate was raging
over this very fact." Since the geographical terms "Galilaean or
Judean" have nothing to do with the genetic terms "Israelite or Jew",
the question makes no sense! Many unrelated people could live in either
Galilee or Judah, and therefore can only apply to a place, while
Israelite or Jew can only be peoples who could live in any of many
different countries of the world! It is apparent they can�t even ask an
intelligent question! After these clumsily stated nonsensical questions, they
move on to type out this passage thusly:
"40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said. Of
a truth this is the Prophet. 41 Others said, This is the Christ. But some
said, Shall Christ come out of Galilee? 42 Hath not the scripture said That
Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where
David was? 43 So there was a division among the people because of him. 44 And
some of them would have taken him; but no man laid hands on him."
They then make the statement: "It is clear here that
there was a controversy over where He should be born and to (sic) what
bloodline He was descended." Again, Johnson and Walker make an unqualified
statement, for this passage is very distinct concerning both the town of
Bethlehem as the place of birth and the lineage of David as His descent.
Inasmuch as the Herodian-Jews were sure they had killed the promised Redeemer
(Matthew 2:18), the "Jews" ruled out any possibility of Bethlehem of Judaea,
and pointed out how no prophet could come from Galilee. It seems the only ones
who were confused were the Herodian-Jews, unless we include the
Ephraim-Scepter advocates.
After this, they again accuse the Apostle Matthew of
misquoting at Micah 5:2, which reads:
"But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the
thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that
is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old,
from everlasting." This is how they conjecture,
in their own erratic typing, that Matthew 2:6 should read: "But you,
Bethlehem, in the land of Judah [misquoted by the scribes, should be Ephrata!]
Are not the least among the rulers of Judah: For out of you shall come a Ruler
Who will shepherd My people Israel." If the Apostle Matthew deliberately
misquoted Micah 5:2, as they so preposterously claim, then the physician Luke,
of Colossians 4:14, also misquoted at Luke 2:4. And if David was from
Bethlehem of Judaea (and he was), then John (the beloved Disciple of Messiah)
also misquoted at John 7:42! How many red flashing lights must we observe
before we understand there is something rotten in Denmark? It should be quite
apparent; this Ephraim-Scepter heresy is built on one damnable lie right after
another.
Then the Ephraim-Scepter people continue to erratically
type from John 7:45-52, keying in on verse 52, which they type (non-italics
mine): "They [the Pharisees] answered and
said unto him [Nicodemus], �Art thou also of
Galilee? Search and look, for no prophet has arisen out of Galilee." These
Ephraim-Scepter people then make the statement: "This [verse] is a very
deliberate lie!" Again, it should be stated: Galilee is not Ephraim, and
Ephraim is not Galilee (look it up on any map of Palestine showing the
locations of the tribes. Galilee was formerly Zebulun with Manasseh separating
Zebulun (Galilee) and Ephraim). In other words, to travel from Ephraim to
Zebulun, one had to go through Manasseh. Again, Galilee [Zebulun] is not
Ephraim and Ephraim is not Galilee [Zebulun]! (lunacy unending!)
SOME MORE OF THEIR CRAFTY SLEIGHT-OF-HAND
This is the old Canaanite merchant game of "bait and
switch", designed for simple-minded suckers. The object is to get the victim�s
eye on the "bait" while switching to another object. In other words, now you
see it; now you don�t! It is nothing more than the old Canaanite variety of
"Jewish" hocus-pocus, sometimes referred to as abracadabra! Using this
Canaanite-Jew�s system of bait and switch, the Ephraim-Scepter advocates setup
their unwary prey by typing 1st Samuel 17:12:
"Now David was
the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehem-judah, whose name was Jesse; and he
had eight sons: and the man went among men for
an old man in the days of Saul." You have
now been introduced to the "bait", after which next comes the preparation for
the "switch." To accomplish this they will erratically type Romans 1:3,
showing that: "Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our lord, which was made of
the seed of David according to the flesh." This is a softening-up process
getting you ready for the ultimate switch. Then by typing another passage at 2nd
Timothy 2:8, they continue their sly maneuver to position you for their trap:
"Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead
according to my gospel." Let us now analyze the process they are using in
order to deceive you. By citing the truth from two outstanding Scriptures that
Messiah was the seed of David, you�re expected to believe they will tell the
truth the third time around when they pull "the switch": "Hath not the
Scripture said, that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town
of Bethlehem, where David was? Clearly Christ is the seed and offspring of
David who, it has been shown was of the House of Ephraim." Now if you
believe the last phrase of this last sentence, you are as an Eskimo in need of
a refrigerator and you�ve been had. You�ve just been "baited" and "switched",
Canaanite style and you�ve been sucker-punched. Wanna try for the Brooklyn
Bridge? Notice once more the process: two outstanding truthful references from
Scripture, followed by a two part sentence; the first part a cardinal truth
followed in the second segment by a crafty, misleading lie!
They then have the gall to accuse the scribes of lying and
continue typing thusly: "Now get ready for the final nail in the coffin lid
of deceit and deception of the scribes! Who do you think the Land of Israel
belongs to, the Jews or the Arabs? This Land belongs neither to the Jews nor
the Arabs. Ephraim himself holds the title deed, (no the world in its fullness
belongs to Yahshua ... Ephraim may have possession only)." Notice, once
again, the Ephraim-Scepter people leave the Tribe of Manasseh completely out
of the picture, when actually they shared in the birthright, Genesis 49:22-26.
And when it says "Joseph" it includes both Ephraim and Manasseh, for both were
blessed, not just one. At Genesis 48:5 Jacob said,
"Ephraim and Manasseh which were born unto
thee in the land of Egypt before I came unto thee in Egypt, are mine;
as Reuben and Simeon, they are mine." Although
Ephraim got a greater blessing, where do these Ephraim-Scepter people come up
with all this partiality? Here Jacob claims all his children, and Jacob gave
Judah the Scepter in Genesis 49:8-12:
"8 Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall
be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father�s children shall bow down
before thee. 9 Judah is a lion�s whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art
gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall
rouse him up? 10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from
between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering
of the people be. 11 Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass�s colt
unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the
blood of grapes: 12 His eyes shall be red with wine, and his teeth with
white milk." All this, according to the
Ephraim-Scepter people, is one big scribal lie. How absurd!
It surely is strange how the Ephraim-Scepter advocates come
up with all their idiotic, harebrained, off-the-wall, freakish notions. I will
now show you how Scripture has made them liars once again. In 2nd
Samuel 2:4, we are told David was anointed king over Judah. This passage says:
"And the men of Judah came, and there
they anointed David king over the house of Judah. And they told David, saying,
That the men of Jabeshgilead were they that buried Saul."
For the story of this passage, I will use the Believer�s Bible Commentary
by William MacDonald, page 325:
"Coronation as King of Judah, 2nd Samuel
2:1-7 ... With Saul dead and Israel without a king, David sought guidance from
the Lord and was directed to go to Hebron, one of the cities of Judah. There
the men of Judah ... anointed him as their king. When they informed him how
the men of Jabesh Gilead had kindly buried Saul, David immediately sent a
message of thanks to them and rather indirectly invited them to recognize him
as king, as the men of Judah had done.
"Conflict with Saul�s House, 2nd Samuel
2:8-11 ... But not all the tribes of Israel wanted to recognize David as their
monarch. Abner, the commander-in-chief of the late Saul and also his uncle,
took Saul�s only surviving son, Ishbosheth, and proclaimed him king. For seven
years and six months ... David reigned over the lone tribe of Judah, with
Hebron as his capital. However, it was for only two of these years that
Ishbosheth ... reigned over the other eleven tribes. It may have taken Abner
five years to push the Philistines back out of Israel and establish Ishbosheth
on his father�s throne ..." Isn�t it simply incredible how David (a supposed
Ephraimite) would rule over the lone Tribe of Judah for seven and a half
years, while Ishbosheth would rule over the other eleven tribes? Why are we
not informed of an objection from the Tribe of Ephraim on such a thing?
Because David was never of the Tribe of Ephraim; that�s why! (insanity
supreme) "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."
- - Yeats. (and especially with Holy Writ)
In stark contrast to the southern Kingdom of Judah, which
included the territory of Benjamin, the northern Kingdom, which was made up of
the other ten tribes and designated as Ephraim, chose non-Davidic kings. How
do the Ephraim-Scepter heretics account for that ironclad fact? In the case of
David, they diametrically chose Ishbosheth the Benjamite, with blood-ties to
the Tribe of Ephraim through Joseph. Then in parallel to that episode, they
chose Jeroboam the Ephraimite of the Tribe of Ephraim over Rehoboam of the
line of David. These concrete facts prove, beyond all doubt, the
Ephraim-Scepter heretics are shamefully and disgracefully ignorant of Biblical
history. Secondly, we need to know just who this Ephraimite Jeroboam was.
There are three different accounts of Jeroboam�s life prior to his becoming
king � two in the LXX, and a third in the MT, the latter of
which forms the basis of most English translations. When we observe such
discrepancies, then it is legitimate to question the scribes or copyists, but
not as the Ephraim-Scepter heretics do by making blanket allegations without
evidence. Check 1st Kings 11:26 - 12:24 LXX, especially
verse 24, and compare it with the Masoretic Text. Among the midrashic
elements added to put Jeroboam in the worst possible light are the following:
(1) (Compare LXX at 11:26.) (2) he attempted a siege of Jerusalem
during Solomon�s reign 12:24b, which is a distortion of MT 11:27 in
which Solomon is said to have repaired a breach in the walls. (3) having fled
to Egypt, he married Shishak�s eldest and most prominent daughter Ano who bore
him a son Abia (verse 24e; cf. the story of the rebel Hadad the Edomite in 1st
Kings 11:14-22 cf. LXX verse 19 with LXX 12:24e to see that Ano
was thought to be the daughter, not the sister-in-law, of Shishak�s wife
Tahpenes. The key words of verse 24e are, ten Ano adelphen Thekeminas ten
presbyteran tes gynaikos autou, �Ano, sister of Thekemina, the eldest of
his wife�), and (4) Shemaiah (not Ahijah; cf. 1st Kings 11:29-39),
the prophet was told by the Lord to go to Jeroboam at Shechem to tear a new
garment into twelve pieces and to tell Jeroboam, �Take for yourself ten shreds
for you to wear� (tou peribalesthai se � a sarcastic purpose
clause; [a rather odd phrase; possibly]). Each of these details seek to
discredit Jeroboam and should probably be ignored when reconstructing his rise
to power. (from The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible,
volume H-L, page 456.)
The Interpreter�s Dictionary of the Bible, vol. E-J,
page 840 does a good job of describing this situation:
"According to the latter account Jeroboam was
an Ephraimite. His mother�s name was Sarira, and she was a harlot.
Consequently, no mention is made of his father�s name. Solomon had made him
overseer of the corv�e of the house of Joseph. He built a city called
Sarira on Mount Ephraim. He built the Akra and enclosed the city of David.
Then he rebelled against Solomon who therefore attempted to kill him, but he
fled to Egypt to the protection of Sousakim (Shishak). There he remained until
the death of Solomon. When word reached him that Solomon was dead, he wanted
to return home, but Sousakim was unwilling to let him go. Parenthetically, we
learn that Jeroboam had married the Pharaoh�s sister-in-law, who had borne him
a son, Abia. Sousakim finally gave permission to return. He came back to
Sarira, where the tribes of Ephraim gathered to him, and there built a
fortress ... After this Jeroboam came to Shechem, where he gathered the tribes
together. This is followed by the prophecy of Samaias the Elamite (cf. 1st
Kings 11:29 ff). The rest of the Greek supplement corresponds to the Hebrew
text of 1st Kings 12:1-24." Where are
the Ephraim-Scepter people on this?
Again, if David was of the Tribe of Ephraim, why didn�t the
Tribe of Ephraim accept him as king? The Ephraim-Scepter people strongly
declare the "Sanhedrin scribes" changed the genealogy of the Messiah from the
Tribe of Ephraim to the Tribe of Judah. Contrary wise, the Bible records no
Ephraim kingly line, so with that hideous, dreamed-up hypothesis, our Redeemer
had no genealogical record! Of the northern Kingdom of Israel, Scripture shows
kings Jeroboam and Nadab as Ephraimites, and kings Baasha and Elah as
Issacharites, with the kings Zimri, Omri, Ahab, Ahaziah, Jehoram, Jehu,
Jehoahaz, Joash, Jeroboam II, Zachariah, Shallum, Menahem, Pekahiah, Pekah and
Hosea with no family or tribal records. It is overwhelmingly evident that no
kingly line can be traced among the kings of the northern Kingdom of Israel.
In addition to that, of all the ten northern tribes of Israel, excepting in
the book of Revelation only the Tribe of Aser (Asher) is mentioned in the New
Testament at Luke 2:36. Therefore, there is no record in either the Old
Testament or the New of a kingly line of Ephraim! If Ephraim is the Scepter
tribe, let�s see the evidence! There isn�t any! PERIOD! If this allegation
were true, about a conspiracy of the "Sanhedrin scribes" changing Ephraim to
Judah (and it isn�t), the scribes would had to have changed 890 entries on
Judah alone! How fantastic, and indeed a falsehood! Do they mean to tell us
this could have happened without someone exposing them? Well, that seems to be
what they are saying! Surely, Yahshua would have warned us if that were true,
and He didn�t (my, what incompetence the Ephraim-Scepter heretics are charging
Him with)! Yes, He did warn us to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, but
He never cautioned us that they would change the record from Ephraim to Judah.
It�s the last thing they (the Pharisees and Sadducees) would have done, for
they love to falsely claim their heritage as Judah, and they would have been
the first to complain if such a change was made! This pregnant fact is quite
evident at Revelation 2:9 and 3:9! It doesn�t say they claim to be of Ephraim
"but do lie", but rather Judah "but do lie." In fact, Revelation 2:9 and 3:9
don�t make any sense if the Scepter tribe was Ephraim! It is clear from this
passage there are both true Judahites and impostor Judahites. As we can
plainly see, this is one area where the "Sanhedrin scribes" wouldn�t have
changed things, so that leaves only Matthew, Luke and John left to accuse,
which these people also do! Like all liars, the Ephraim-Scepter people can�t
keep their story together. Wittingly and deliberately, the Ephraim-Scepter
peddlers of misinformation and confusion have made themselves equal to the
blasphemous liars of John 8:44.
THEIR UTTER LACK OF COMPREHENSION
Once analyzing the motives of the Ephraim-Scepter people,
we can then understand what they teach and promote. The basic underlying
factor is that they have discovered that all the evil in this world stems from
the "Jews." Thus their fundamental incentive is to fight back at this evil
system. But by not studying history (especially Biblical history), they arrive
at some mistaken conclusions. Their basic error comes from their inability to
differentiate between the impostor and the genuine members of the Tribe of
Judah. Therefore, they have formulated the incorrect premise that all the
people professing to be of the Tribe of Judah are satanic. Their dominant
theme is to destroy all of Judah, both the good figs and the bad. Because
their fundamental reasoning is flawed, their objectives are misdirected, and
they become like "one that beateth the air" (1st Corinthians 9:26).
And, rather than helping the cause, they are helping to defeat it. All this
simply because they haven�t done their homework on the subject. As one
Ephraim-Scepter person typed: "This is the document that will set the
satanic jews on their ass by taking away their alleged status as �God�s chosen
people.�" No it will not! For the Ephraim-Scepter message will only aid
and abet the impostors who are calling themselves Judah!
In their all-out attack on all the Tribe of Judah, as
opposed to a few bad-figs which were mainly at Jerusalem, shows their utter
lack of knowledge concerning Biblical history of the deportations of Judah. If
they ever come to that knowledge, they will have to hide their face in a
corner somewhere in shame for some of the uncouth remarks they have made. It
all boils down to a severe case of ignorance! After Tiglath Pileser initially
took many Israelites into Assyrian captivity during 745-727 B.C., Shalmaneser
V deported more throughout 727-722 B.C. In the years 722-705 B.C., Sargon II
continued the process of deporting more Israelites of the northern Kingdom.
Then during the years 705-681 B.C., Sennacherib entered the land of Judah and
deported all the Judahites and many of Benjamin in that area to Assyria,
leaving only the inhabitants of the city of Jerusalem (2nd Kings
18; 2nd Chronicles 32; and Isaiah 36).
This history contains points that I used to interrupt Scott
Vaught in the middle of his presentation in October, 1996, at the Feast of
Tabernacles meeting at Louden, Tennessee. Vaught was mouthing this same
Ephraim-Scepter garbage at that time. In the process, he called Tamar a whore;
said that David and Jonathan were homosexuals in one breath; and said there
was never a historical David in another. Vaught also presented himself as an
expert in Palaeo Hebrew with 15 years experience. He never did show us any
original Palaeo Hebrew manuscripts, but only allegedly converted square style
Hebrew back to the earlier Palaeo. With that he could make Scripture say
anything he wanted. As I listened, he spewed out one vial of poison after
another. His main thrust was to exclude Judah from being part of Israel. Among
his many allegations, he said that Ruth was a Moabite, and thus polluted the
entire line of Judah. He said that he had worn out either four or five Bibles
finding out all these things, and waited for a year or two after that before
he decided to pass on his great revelation to the world. He further intimated
that all of Judah turned out bad and that they are the Jews of today. After
that meeting, I wrote one of the first of a few articles and titled it: The
Lies Of Scott Vaught.
Scott Vaught made a disciple of a man at that meeting by
the name of Buddy Johnson. I sent "tons" of documentation to Buddy, but
evidently to no avail. Since that meeting, Johnson has made a disciple of
another man who was at that meeting by the name of Russell Walker. I simply
cannot sit idly by while this kind of garbage is circulating around the
country, for if I keep quiet on the matter, I become part and parcel of their
lies. The main reason for exposing this is because it is a hindrance to
Yahweh�s Kingdom, and only scatters His sheep.
"He that gathereth not with me scattereth."
Matthew 12:30 & Luke 11:3. This should now give you an idea how some are
trying to elevate their own ego through subterfuge.
Clifton A. Emahiser�s Teaching Ministries
1012 N. Vine Street, Fostoria, Ohio 44830
Phone (419)435-2836
Please Feel Free To Copy, Or Order:
10 for 2.00; 25 for 3.00; 50 for 5.00 or 8.00 per 100
HOME
