Objections Some among the Messianic community, such as TorahResource, have initially distanced themselves from the two-house aspect of Commonwealth Theology (see video: "The Two House Theory.") In response, proponents have asserted a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of Ephraim and Edom—"the rest of mankind." Advocates of Commonwealth Theology note that both traditional ethnic Jews and Messianic Jews are reticent to allow gentiles to be identified with Ephraim (a/k/a the Lost Tribes/House of Israel), although they allow gentile believers in Yeshua to identify outwardly as Jews regarding feast days, dress, diet, Torah, etc. Messianic Jews tend to include the rest of the ten tribes, making them all Jews, whereas these Ten Tribes of Israel were swallowed up among the nations (Hosea 8:7–9); given a writ of divorce (Jer. 3:8); and become
Lo-Ami—no longer His beloved, "for you are not My people, and I will not be your God"—Hosea 1:9; and "made nigh" by the blood of the everlasting covenant in Christ Jesus although far off (Eph. 2:13, 17; Heb. 13:20). Two-House Theology and the notion that the Church is the reconstituted House of Israel have both been challenged by John J. Parsons in his article "Two House Theology: Are Christians the 'Lost Tribes' of Israel?" Parsons articulates his understanding of the two-house system as well as the intuitive conclusion of Commonwealth Theology, that by faith, the Gentile Church has been adopted/grafted in as the bona fide House of Israel. After questioning the relevance of the Bible's two-house narrative to traditional Christian theology, the article concludes with skepticism as to whether a Christian's identification with ethnic Israel could enhance a believer's "daily walk of faith." Without considering the impact of Commonwealth Theology and Two-House Theology on present-day relations between Christians and Jews, Parsons concedes the potential benefits of "identifying with Israel and her destiny," a "sense of belonging and inheritance," and a "deeper appreciation for God's sovereign plans for the nation of Israel."
Significance Commonwealth Theology theologians point out that the
New Covenant of
Jeremiah 31:31 is a direct response to the
Breach of Jeroboam and the resulting desolation of the land brought about by the sins of both houses divided kingdom. The Commonwealth of Israel, mentioned in
Ephesians Ch. 2, is composed of those near and those far, which, according to Commonwealth Theology, alludes to the
House of Judah and the
House of Israel, respectively. The near/far connection is substantiated by the fact that this same language was used in the
Book of Daniel, associating "near" with Judah and "far" with those driven (scattered), that is, "Israel": "O Lord, righteousness belongs to You, but us the shame of face, as it is this day—to the men of Judah, to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and all Israel, those near and those far off in all the countries to which You have driven them, because of the unfaithfulness which they have committed against You" (Dan. 9:7). (See "
Assyrian captivity"). The House of Israel remained scattered at the time Second Kings was written—"there was none left but the
tribe of Judah alone...So Israel was carried away from their land to Assyria, as it is to this day (Cir. 550 BC.)" (2 Kings 17:18–23)–and the Northern Tribes were scattered at the time of the writing of Daniel. The
diaspora of the House of Israel among the nations (gentiles) resulted in the partial fulfillment of Hosea's prophecy: "For I will no longer have mercy on the house of Israel, but I will utterly take them away." "Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered." "Then the children of Judah and the children of Israel shall be gathered together..." (Hos. 1:6,10,11). Commonwealth Theology addresses the mystery of how the Northern Kingdom (Ephraim) could be scattered, "lost," "mixed with the peoples," "not a people," and yet could re-assume its identity and be reunited with Judah, whereas mainline Christian theologies either assess the Bible's many references to the two houses as trivial information or else suppose that the Northern Kingdom had already reassembled before the time of Christ. At issue is the relationship between the Church and the Jews due to Christ's first coming and a fuller understanding of the gathering at Christ's second coming.
The Two Houses and the marriage covenant Commonwealth theologians propose that Paul's reference to the institution of marriage as representing Christ and the Church (Eph. 5:32) points to Old Testament allusions to God's divorce and remarriage with Israel; for instance, the New Covenant passage in Jeremiah 31, "though I [God] was a husband to them." In the third chapter of
One in Messiah, Douglas Hamp points to other verses that speak of God's divorce and provision for future reunification, as well as mentioning the Old Testament stipulation prohibiting return to a former spouse after unfaithfulness. "Then her former husband [Yahweh] who divorced her [Israel] must not take her [Israel] back to be his wife after she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before Yahweh." (Deut. 24:4a). Hamp suggests that the death and resurrection of
Yeshua resolved the legal dilemma so that a new marriage covenant could be established between the same parties. Hamp also maintains a difference between the Law of the Marriage Covenant and God's instructions (the Law–Torah) that was also given at Mount Sinai. == Law and Grace ==