Efrain, A "Multitude of nations?"
How did Ephraim become a “multitude of nations”?
From Genesis 48.
8. When Israel saw the sons of Joseph, they asked, “Who are these?”
9 “They are the children that God has given me here,” Joseph said to his father. Then Israel said, “Bring them to me so I can bless them.” 10 Now Israel’s eyes were failing due to old age, and they could hardly see. So Joseph brought his children closer, and their father kissed and hugged them. 11 Israel said to Joseph, “I never expected to see your face again, and now God has allowed me to see your children too.”
12Then Joseph took them off Israel’s knees and fell on his face to the ground. 13 And Joseph took them both, Ephraim on his right, toward the left of Israel, and Manasseh on his left, toward the right of Israel, and drew them near him. 14But Israel reached out his right hand and put it on the head of Ephraim, although he was the youngest, and crossing his arms, he put his left hand on the head of Manasseh, although Manasseh was the firstborn.
… 17When José saw that his father put his right hand on Efraín’s head, he was disgusted; so he took his father’s hand to move it from the head of Ephraim to the head of Manasseh. 18 Joseph said to him, “No, my father, this is the firstborn; put your right hand on his head.” 19But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know. He too will become a people, and he too will become great. However, his younger brother will be older than him, and his offspring will come to be a group of nations. “
Here we have a problem. As far as we can tell, through verifiable and respected sources, the descendants of the Jews of Ephraim never gave birth to another nation as we know it, much less a multitude, or even a “group” (NIV) of nations. I can later share how the NIV and a couple of other people had the audacity to go to another Hebrew word entirely here. The Hebrew word that is translated “crowd” can be “assembly” and the like, but nothing as small as “group”, for which the Hebrew uses a completely different word.
Tracing the idea of ”assembly” in Genesis and elsewhere, most of the time it refers to the multitudes of people within the nation of Israel, so we have gained little by using that word. All major translations and most minor translations use “multitude” as their word of choice.
So we are in a bind. The descendants of Ephraim were not makers of nations. I quote from Wikipedia here:
“As part of the Kingdom of Israel, the territory of Ephraim was conquered by the Assyrians,
[that’s in the Bible, several times] and the banished tribe; the form of his exile caused his history to be lost. [Hence the “10 lost tribes” that everyone wants to claim as their own].
“However, several groups today claim to descend [only several, not a multitude], with different levels of academic and rabbinical support. The Samaritans claim that some of their followers are descended from this tribe, and many Persian Jews claim to be descendants of Ephraim. Further afield, in India, Telugu Jews claim descent from Ephraim and call themselves Bene Ephraim, relating traditions similar to those of the Mizo Jews, whom the modern state of Israel regards as descendants of Manasseh.[23]
Various Western Christian groups, particularly those of the Church of God in Christ, claim that the entire United Kingdom is a direct descendant of Ephraim, and that the entire United States is a direct descendant of Manasseh, as Jacob interpreted as having said that these two tribes would become the most supreme nations in the world … “
So when Ephraim, with all of Israel, was invaded by Assyria, did the resulting intermarriage with the nations produce peoples of Jewish blood throughout the known world?
There is no help there. Let’s go back to the scriptures. Maybe Joshua? When he conquered Canaan, he and his people became lord of many nations, but for the most part they became extinct. Joshua was from Ephraim! But could the Canaanite nations be considered “descendants” of him and of Ephraim? Were the Canaanites now Israelites, Ephraimites? And was not Joshua a joint heir of Canaan with all the people of Israel?
Jeroboam, the soon-to-be evil Ephraimite, also ruled over the ten “tribes” of Israel. Are the ten tribes really ten nations? But does Jeroboam force them all to be Ephraimites so that the prophecy will now be fulfilled?
Some have messed with the text a bit more by changing the word “multitude” to “fullness” and making nations unique. Ephraim will be the “fullness of the nation,” whatever that means.
Ephraim was always an important part of Israel, even if it was negatively significant most of the time. They were larger (later smaller) than Manasseh, which would fulfill the first part of the prophecy. But the “fullness” does not appear to be quantifiable and therefore it is not easy to see when it is fulfilled.
We are running out of options. I don’t think we should accept a bad option if it seems like there are no good ones. We can relegate all of this to the future and speak of a time when lost tribes will meet, populate nations, and fulfill this prophecy directly …
… or there is a last way if that is not the way. Instead of focusing on “multitude”, we can take a closer look at the Hebrew for “nations.” It’s familiar to us, I think. It is the popular “Goy” (s) or “Goyim” in plural. We translate it often, gentlemen. Because, any nation other than Israel is simply a nation. The word is also translated “people” when the text requires it. And there is a ray of light for us. Is Genesis 48:19 one of those times when “Goyim” should be translated as “people” and not “nations”?
“People” is used to translate “goy” (the singular, not the plural) in isolated passages in some of the prophets. Once in Kings. In Joshua, 3 times most of the translators went this way, one in particular that is of interest to this discussion, in Joshua 5: 6:
“For the children of Israel walked forty years in the wilderness, until all the people who had come out of Egypt, men of war, were consumed, because they did not obey the voice of the LORD.”
Obviously, Joshua is not talking about a nation. It was a subset of the nation of Israel, the men of war who came out of Egypt and disobeyed and died. The nation won’t fit in here, but the “people” will, and that’s where the translators went.
So even though “goy” or “goyim” generally means a foreign nation, its basic idea is a group of people (hence the NIV understanding). With that understanding of the Hebrew word, the text lines up beautifully.
Ephraim will be great. Greater than Manasseh, at least initially. Tons of tribes, clans, and families will emerge from Ephraim, and his people will dominate Israel, for better or for worse.
It may be important to note here how some prophecies are temporary and based on people’s circumstances. Ephraim, like Abel, Isaac, Jacob, David … were not firstborn, but were chosen by God to be his blessings anyway. Ephraim did win supremacy, as Jacob saw before his time. According to the first census of Israel, where Ephraim numbered eight thousand more than his brother Manasseh. And Ephraim became the father of many clans in Israel.
But Ephraim fell from that grace. I’m not sure why. But at the end of the book of Numbers, in the second census, Ephraim had lost eight thousand souls, while Manasseh had gained twenty thousand. A major fall was accomplished by leading Israel, through Jeroboam’s idolatry, into the pit of total rejection of God. To this day, no one even knows what happened to Efrain. May this fall teach us.
We are a chosen generation, to be sure, but pride can still mark us. Hurt us. Destroy us.
