Where in the Bible is America to be found?

 Where in the Bible is America to be found? What about Great Britain?” Considering the huge impact these two nations have had on the modern world and that they will undoubtedly play leading roles in any end-time scenario—it is inconceivable that God would choose to omit even so much as a mention of them in Bible prophecy. Indeed, their apparent absence from the Bible has puzzled many. But as we have demonstrated, America and Britain are none other than the latter-day descendants of the Israelite tribe of Joseph—Ephraim and Manasseh. The problem, then, has not been their absence from the Scriptures, but that scholars have failed to realize the biblical originsof America and Britain—failed to identify them for who they are: modern Israelites.  It is by that name—Israel—that Britain and America are identified in literally scores of biblical prophecies.

The key to understanding this issue lies in Genesis 48:16. As was the Hebrew custom, the patriarch Jacob was preparing to pass on the family “birthright blessings,” which would include the amazing blessings of national greatness, that God had promised to Abraham. Such blessings normally went to the firstborn son. But because of sin, Jacob’s actual firstborn son, Reuben, was disqualified. Joseph, however, was also a firstborn son, from the wife Jacob truly loved, Rachel. Thus, the birthright belonged to Joseph—or, as events would have it, to his sons (I Chron. 5:1-2). Jacob was intent on essentially adopting Joseph’s two boys, Ephraim and Manasseh.

They would become as sons to him. This enabled Jacob to pass the birthright directly to both of Joseph’s sons. Manasseh was actually the firstborn. It was apparently Jacob’s desire that Ephraim not only share in the birthright, but actually receive the greater blessing—hence Jacob “wittingly” crossed his hands so that his favoured right hand rested on Ephraim. All of this, of course, was carefully guided by God as part of His overall plan for the children of Israel.

But the patriarch did something else that was equally astonishing. In Genesis 48:5, he said Ephraim and Manasseh would be his sons. Thus, in adopting the two boys, Jacob gave them his very name. “Let my name be named on them” (verse 16; KJV)—or, as the NIV has it, “May they be called by my name.

Few understand the prophetic significance of this statement. Modern Ephraim and Manasseh carry the name Israel. Conversely, other nations of Israelite ancestry—despite definite links to the “lost” ten tribes—were not to bear the name Israel. For example, scholars who have studied this subject believe the French are largely descended from the tribe of Reuben; likewise, the people of the Netherlands (Holland) are ancestrally related to the tribe of Zebulun; and the Finnish, for the most part, are descendants of the tribe of Issachar.

To be sure, the key to understanding much of biblical prophecy is to comprehend the profound significance of Jacob’s words: “Let my name be named on them.” Ephraim and Manasseh were to carry the name of Jacob: Israel. The implications of this fact are astounding. It means that scores of prophecies are misapplied to the Jews or relegated to “Israel’s history” now come alive with present-day meaning for modern-day Ephraim and Manasseh—Britain and America.

 But there is yet additional proof of prophecy applying specifically to modern Israel—to America and Britain. The priest-prophet Ezekiel was among the Jewish captives taken to Babylon during Judah’s exile. Ezekiel 1:1-3

Interestingly, however, Ezekiel was given prophecies specifically directed to the House of Israel.Was Ezekiel realistically expected to deliver his message to the then-scattered “lost” tribes that had already begun to migrate to the northwest? More importantly, why would Ezekiel be required to deliver a message warning of imminent destruction and captivity to a people who had already been exiled over a century earlier? Ezekiel 2:3, shows that the prophet was to go to “the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation.”

Chapter three says Ezekiel was to be a watchman to the “house of Israel” (verses 1, 4, 5, 7, 17, etc.). Claims that references to the “house of Israel” are directed at the Jewish people; The House of Judah, are in error and cannot apply to them.

In Ezekiel 4:5-6 we see that both the House of Israel and the House of Judah are mentioned contemporaneously. Clearly, Ezekiel knew the difference. Moreover, what would be the point of warning the Jews of impending captivity when they had just been exiled?

As Ezekiel 33:7 brings out, a watchman’s job was to sound the alarm when the nation was facing an imminent attack. But it also included warning the nation of God’s judgment: And you, son of man, I have set you as watchman to the house of Israel. Therefore you shall hear the Word from My mouth, and warn them from Me.

Ezekiel’s watchman message warned of impending destruction and national captivity. In chapters 6-7, for example, Ezekiel is given a dire warning to deliver to the “mountains of Israel”—figuratively representing the nation itself. Again, the question must be asked: How was Ezekiel to deliver his “watchman” message to a widely scattered, migrating group of tribes that had already been exiled 130 years earlier?

When did Ezekiel fulfill this commission? There is no record—biblical or secular—of Ezekiel ever attempting to go to the long-exiled “lost” tribes of Israel. And what would be the point of such a message? Israel had already been conquered and its people taken captive. The only answer that makes sense is that Ezekiel’s message was not for ancient Israel, but is an advance warning to those who today bear the  prophetic name Israel—Britain and America.

Ezekiel 36 highlights ancient Israel’s captivity to the Assyrians; employing the principle of duality, it also describes the latter-day captivity of modern Israel. A restoration is again promised—a restoration that can now only be fulfilled in the end times, before Jesus Returns.

Ref: Philip Neal