Those who know the story of the twelve sons of Jacob realize that Joseph was by no means the firstborn—in fact, he was Jacob's eleventh son, though the firstborn of Rachel. Why did God choose to bestow the birthright blessing on Joseph? Deuteronomy 33:16 provides the key to the answer: "Let the blessing come on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him who was separate from his brothers."

God honored Joseph because he "was separate from his brothers." He was separate in that he alone remained faithful to his God. Conspicuous by their absence are the names of Joseph's brothers from the Faith Chapter; Hebrews 11 does not mention Reuben, Judah, Dan, Gad, or any other of Jacob's sons. Verse 22 emphasizes Joseph's faithfulness: "By faith Joseph, when he was dying, made mention of the departure of the children of Israel, and gave instructions concerning his bones" (see Genesis 50:22-26).

Allaying his brothers' fears of retribution and revenge, Joseph explained his understanding that God had placed him in power in Egypt "to preserve a posterity for you in the earth, and to save your lives by a great deliverance" (Genesis 45:7). To his dying day, he never broke faith with his brothers. As recorded in Genesis 50:20-21, he reassures them of their well-being after their father's death: "But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive. Now therefore, do not be afraid; I will provide for you and your little ones."

Nor did he ever break faith with his God. Dying, he reminded his brothers that God would bring their posterity out of Egypt, restoring them "to the land of which He swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob" (Genesis 50:24).

The two sons of Joseph, Ephraim and Manasseh, received the birthright blessings because their father was separate, ethically and morally, from his perfidious, scheming brothers. His brothers exhibited few scruples concerning killing Joseph, forswearing murder only when they saw the opportunity to profit from selling him into slavery. Compounding their depravity, they darkened their father's days by sustaining the ruse of Joseph's death for more than a decade.

What a paradox! Modern Ephraim and Manasseh have used the wealth and influence God gave them because of Joseph's faithfulness to push on Gentile nations a way of life totally contrary to God's way. Rather than separating from the ways of this world, as their father Joseph did, modern-day Ephraim and Manasseh push globalism—another term for the Babylonian system of "get"—on the whole world. Sifted among the nations, Joseph subverts those around him rather than serving as an example of godliness to the Gentiles.

For purposes of inheritance, Jacob, also called Israel, adopted Joseph's sons, claiming them as his own. Genesis 48:5 records how he tells Joseph, "Your two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh . . . are mine; as Reuben and Simeon, they shall be mine." In verse 16, Jacob asserts, "Let my name be named upon them. . . ."

Jacob, in effect, subdivided the tribe of Joseph into two parts: In verse 22, he tells Joseph, "I have given to you one portion above your brothers. . . ." Joseph received two portions, his own and another "above" his brothers. Joshua 14:4 states the consequence of this arrangement: "The children of Joseph were two tribes: Manasseh and Ephraim." When it came time to divide Canaan among the tribes, Joshua understood that the tribe of Joseph was to receive a double inheritance: one for Manasseh, another for Ephraim.

For all that, as often as not, we say the names Ephraim and Manasseh in one breath. The Scriptures regularly treat Ephraim and Manasseh—whether as two brothers or as two tribes—as if they were connected at the hip, that is, in a two-in-one arrangement. So it is today: England and America are separate nations that enjoy a great deal in common. They share a common language, similar traditions, laws, and culture, as well as political and economic institutions. For decades, Britain has been "America's truest and most important ally" (Conrad Black, "Britain's Atlantic Option," The National Interest, Spring 1999, p. 15.) The two nations act in concert more often than not. Together, they collaborate as the leaders of Western civilization.

Consider for a minute the combined global economic impact of Ephraim and Manasseh. Much of this planet's transportation and education systems, food-processing techniques, medical technology, and drugs—legitimate and illegitimate—have been pushed on the world by American and British business interests. London and New York remain key financial centers to this day. The U.S. and Britain have developed our modern instruments of war, which they sell to whomever they will. They also push their own form of government and economics (various interpretations of democracy and capitalism) on as many nations as will have them, even forcing them on some peoples. Finally, the world receives most of its information (for example, news and documentaries) and entertainment (rock music, movies, and television) from American and British sources. The primary telecommunication companies—the BBC, NBC, CNN, CBS, ABC, and FOX—are all owned and operated by Ephraimite and Manassite interests.

In short, the modern-day tribes of Manasseh and Ephraim generally recognize common national interests. The two have traditionally acted separately, yet in concert, to push their culture and their lifestyle on "the peoples to the ends of the earth" (Deuteronomy 33:17).