Ephraim and Manasseh

Opening Orientation for Section 5#

Section 4 established the legal hinge of the double portion. Reuben forfeited the birthright. Joseph's sons received it. Judah prevailed above his brethren, and from Judah came the chief ruler. The study now has to preserve the distinction without losing either side of Joseph's house.

It would be easy to move immediately from Ephraim's greater blessing to Hosea, Ezekiel, Joshua, Galilee, and the nations. But doing that too quickly would create a new flattening. Manasseh would become only the older brother who was passed over. That is not how Genesis 48 presents him, and it is not how the later inheritance texts treat him.

Manasseh is Joseph's firstborn. Jacob does not place the right hand on him, but Jacob does bless him. Jacob does not give him the greater future, but Jacob says he also shall become a people and also shall be great. Then the biblical story later preserves an unusual legal witness inside Manasseh through the daughters of Zelophehad. When a father dies with no sons, God does not let the name and inheritance be cut off. He commands a legal path for preservation.

1. Why Manasseh Must Not Be Skipped#

The temptation is to treat Manasseh as a contrast figure only. Ephraim is younger but greater; Manasseh is older but lower. That much is true, but it is not enough. Scripture does not introduce Manasseh merely to make Ephraim look important. Manasseh is part of Joseph's double portion and part of Israel's adopted tribal structure.

Genesis 48 is not Jacob blessing Ephraim instead of Manasseh. It is Jacob blessing Joseph through both sons, adopting both sons, naming both sons under Israel, and setting both inside the inheritance structure. The crossed hands establish order, but the blessing still includes both. If Ephraim is studied without Manasseh, the double portion becomes one-sided. The birthright stream becomes reduced to multiplication and loses the preservation witness.

The later story confirms this. Manasseh appears in census, inheritance, tribal allotment, and the legal claim of Zelophehad's daughters. The Spirit does not let Manasseh disappear. Therefore the study should not let him disappear either.

2. Manasseh: Firstborn of Joseph, Named in the Place of Affliction#

Genesis 41:50-51

And unto Joseph were born two sons before the years of famine came, which Asenath the daughter of Poti-pherah priest of On bare unto him. And Joseph called the name of the firstborn Manasseh: For God, said he, hath made me forget all my toil, and all my father's house.

Manasseh is born in Egypt before the famine years. His mother is Asenath, daughter of Poti-pherah priest of On. His father is Joseph, an Israelite son who had been rejected by his brothers, sold, falsely accused, imprisoned, and then exalted by God into a position of rule and provision. Manasseh is not born in the land of Canaan, but in the land of Joseph's affliction and exaltation.

His name is Joseph's testimony. Joseph does not give him an Egyptian identity statement. He does not say Egypt has healed him, Pharaoh has healed him, or the house of On has healed him. Joseph says God has made him forget all his toil and all his father's house. Manasseh's name is born from grief, but not grief as final identity. It is grief answered by God.

This matters because Manasseh's witness begins as healing from affliction. Joseph had not ceased to be Joseph. He had not abandoned the God of his fathers. He had not forgotten the promise in the sense of covenant amnesia. But the pain of his toil and the wound of his father's house no longer governed him in the same way. God had brought him through affliction into provision.

3. The Meaning of Manasseh: Forgetting, Healing, and the Memory of God#

The name Manasseh is connected to causing to forget. In Joseph's own explanation, the forgetting has two objects: all his toil and all his father's house. This statement should not be read as Joseph despising his father, rejecting the promise, or removing himself from Israel. Genesis 50 proves the opposite. Joseph still believes God will visit Israel and bring them up out of Egypt. He gives commandment concerning his bones because he still belongs to the promise.

Genesis 50:24-25

And Joseph said unto his brethren, I die: and God will surely visit you, and bring you out of this land unto the land which he sware to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. And Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence.

Therefore Manasseh's 'forgetting' cannot mean covenant disconnection. It means God has relieved Joseph from the crushing weight of his affliction. Joseph can now preserve life without being ruled by the wound that brought him there. He can feed the brothers who sold him. He can see God's purpose above their evil. He can name his firstborn as a testimony that God has answered toil.

This creates an important contrast with Ephraim. Manasseh is the first witness: God heals the wound and prevents affliction from owning the future. Ephraim is the second witness: God makes Joseph fruitful in the land of affliction. Healing and fruitfulness belong together. Forgetting and multiplication belong together. Preservation and expansion belong together.

4. Genesis 48: Manasseh Is Lowered but Not Rejected#

Genesis 48:13-14

And Joseph took them both, Ephraim in his right hand toward Israel's left hand, and Manasseh in his left hand toward Israel's right hand, and brought them near unto him. And Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim's head, who was the younger, and his left hand upon Manasseh's head, guiding his hands wittingly; for Manasseh was the firstborn.

The text emphasizes that Manasseh was the firstborn. Joseph arranges the boys according to expected order: Manasseh toward Jacob's right hand and Ephraim toward Jacob's left. Jacob reverses that order intentionally. The phrase 'guiding his hands wittingly' matters. This is not confusion from old age. Jacob's natural eyes are dim, but his prophetic sight is active.

Joseph is displeased because he recognizes the legal weight of the right hand. He attempts to correct Jacob. Jacob refuses correction. But the refusal must be read carefully. Jacob refuses to place Manasseh above Ephraim; he does not refuse Manasseh as a son. Jacob will speak a real blessing over Manasseh.

Genesis 48:17-19

And when Joseph saw that his father laid his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, it displeased him: and he held up his father's hand, to remove it from Ephraim's head unto Manasseh's head. And Joseph said unto his father, Not so, my father: for this is the firstborn; put thy right hand upon his head. And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations.

The words 'he also' should be allowed to stand with their full weight. Manasseh also becomes a people. Manasseh also becomes great. The greater word belongs to Ephraim, but Manasseh receives a real word, not a consolation prize. He remains included in the blessing Joseph receives through his sons.

5. Manasseh Will Become a People and Be Great#

Jacob's word over Manasseh should be taken seriously. 'He also shall become a people, and he also shall be great.' That means Manasseh belongs inside the future of Israel. He is not a failed brother whose only purpose is to be surpassed. He is a great people within the Joseph birthright structure.

This helps keep the study balanced. Ephraim's greater future creates the multitude-of-nations trail and later prophetic tension. Manasseh's greatness creates the preservation trail. The two are not in competition. Together they form Joseph's double portion. A double portion requires more than one witness. Joseph receives increase through both sons.

The order is also meaningful. Joseph names Manasseh first and Ephraim second. Jacob places Ephraim before Manasseh in the blessing. Later Scripture preserves both. The order of birth, the order of naming, and the order of blessing all carry information. Joseph's memory of healed affliction comes first. Then fruitfulness in affliction follows. Jacob then elevates fruitfulness while preserving the healing witness.

6. Manasseh and the Two-Sided Inheritance Witness#

Manasseh's inheritance later has an unusual two-sided quality. A portion of Manasseh is connected with territory east of Jordan, and another portion is connected west of Jordan. This should be handled carefully, without forcing symbolism, but it is worth noticing as part of Manasseh's complexity.

Joshua 13:29-31

And Moses gave inheritance unto the half tribe of Manasseh: and this was the possession of the half tribe of the children of Manasseh by their families. And their coast was from Mahanaim, all Bashan, all the kingdom of Og king of Bashan, and all the towns of Jair, which are in Bashan, threescore cities: And half Gilead, and Ashtaroth, and Edrei, cities of the kingdom of Og in Bashan, were pertaining unto the children of Machir the son of Manasseh, even to the one half of the children of Machir by their families.

Joshua 17:5-6

And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side Jordan; Because the daughters of Manasseh had an inheritance among his sons: and the rest of Manasseh's sons had the land of Gilead.

Manasseh is not a simple one-location witness. He is involved in inheritance on both sides of Jordan. The land east of Jordan and the land west of Jordan both appear in connection with Manasseh. This makes Manasseh a boundary-aware inheritance witness. He is associated with possession already taken east of Jordan and possession apportioned west of Jordan.

For the purposes of this study, the safest claim is not that Manasseh symbolically means every boundary-crossing idea. The safer claim is that Manasseh's inheritance story is legally and geographically complex, and that this complexity fits his larger role as a preserved-inheritance witness. His house carries questions of portion, boundary, family line, daughters, sons, tribal identity, and possession.

7. The Genealogical Setting: Machir, Gilead, and the House of Manasseh#

Numbers 26:28-34

The sons of Joseph after their families were Manasseh and Ephraim. Of the sons of Manasseh: of Machir, the family of the Machirites: and Machir begat Gilead: of Gilead come the family of the Gileadites. These are the sons of Gilead: of Jeezer, the family of the Jeezerites: of Helek, the family of the Helekites: And of Asriel, the family of the Asrielites: and of Shechem, the family of the Shechemites: And of Shemida, the family of the Shemidaites: and of Hepher, the family of the Hepherites. And Zelophehad the son of Hepher had no sons, but daughters: and the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, and Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. These are the families of Manasseh, and those that were numbered of them, fifty and two thousand and seven hundred.

Numbers 26 gives the genealogical setting. Joseph's sons are Manasseh and Ephraim. Then Manasseh's family line is traced through Machir, Gilead, and the families descending from Gilead. Within that structure appears Hepher, and then Zelophehad son of Hepher. Zelophehad has no sons, but daughters.

The text names the daughters: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. Their names are not hidden in a private family note. They are placed inside the census-and-inheritance setting. That matters because the upcoming issue is not merely personal grief. It is legal inheritance inside the tribe of Manasseh, inside Joseph's birthright house, inside the preparation to possess the land.

This means the Manasseh preservation witness is not detached from the larger study. It arises from the same Joseph structure. A son of Joseph receives inheritance through Manasseh; a house within Manasseh appears endangered because there are no sons; the daughters bring the matter forward; God rules that their claim is right. The preserved-inheritance witness is not a later doctrinal idea imposed on the text. It is built into the narrative.

8. Zelophehad's Daughters: The Breach That Forces a Legal Question#

Numbers 27:1-2

Then came the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph: and these are the names of his daughters; Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah. And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,

Numbers 27 repeats the genealogy deliberately. Zelophehad is not introduced vaguely. He is son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Machir, son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph. The text keeps Joseph, Manasseh, Machir, Gilead, Hepher, and Zelophehad in view. The legal question is rooted in a named inheritance line.

The daughters stand before Moses, Eleazar the priest, the princes, and all the congregation, by the door of the tabernacle. This is formal. It is not rebellion, gossip, complaint from the edge of the camp, or private grievance. They bring a legal petition to the appointed authority at the place where God meets His people.

Their circumstance exposes a breach in the ordinary pattern. Their father died and had no sons. If inheritance passes only through sons and there is no son, what happens to the father's name and portion? Does the house disappear? Is the inheritance absorbed elsewhere? Is the name cut off because the ordinary line is broken? Their question forces Israel to receive a legal answer from God.

9. 'Our Father Died in the Wilderness': Guilt, Judgment, and Non-Rebellion#

Numbers 27:3

Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the LORD in the company of Korah; but died in his own sin, and had no sons.

The daughters speak carefully. Their father died in the wilderness. He died in his own sin. They do not deny death, sin, or the wilderness judgment. But they also distinguish him from the company of Korah. He was not part of the public rebellion that gathered against the LORD in Korah's company.

This distinction is important. They are not pretending their father was sinless. They are not claiming entitlement by denying judgment. They are bringing the exact facts: he died in the wilderness, he died in his own sin, he had no sons, but he was not part of Korah's rebellion. Therefore the question is not whether rebellion should be rewarded. The question is whether a house should be cut off when the father died without sons.

This precision matters for the broader study because preserved inheritance is not lawlessness. God does not preserve inheritance by ignoring sin, judgment, or guilt. The daughters' claim is legally careful. The issue is not the removal of accountability, but the preservation of a name within the covenant inheritance when the ordinary line is broken.

10. 'Give Unto Us a Possession': The Rightness of Their Claim#

Numbers 27:4-5

Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son? Give unto us therefore a possession among the brethren of our father. And Moses brought their cause before the LORD.

Their question is direct: Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family because he hath no son? The concern is name and possession. The name of the father should not vanish from among his family, and the possession should remain among the brethren of the father.

This is why the text belongs in the Manasseh Section. Manasseh means Joseph's grief was healed; Manasseh receives a real blessing; Manasseh later carries a legal case where a family line appears endangered; and God gives a ruling that preserves name and inheritance. The theme is not accidental. The Manasseh line becomes a place where God publicly answers the problem of a threatened house.

Moses does not decide by personal sympathy. He brings their cause before the LORD. This is crucial. The answer will not be merely Moses' compassion, social adjustment, or practical compromise. It will be divine judgment on the rightness of the inheritance claim.

11. God Rules in Favor of Preserved Inheritance#

Numbers 27:6-7

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them.

The LORD's answer is decisive: 'The daughters of Zelophehad speak right.' This is one of the strongest lines in the preserved-inheritance witness. God does not merely allow an exception. He states that their claim is right. He commands that a possession of inheritance be given among their father's brethren, and that the inheritance of their father pass unto them.

This makes Manasseh's witness much more than a name meaning. Inside Manasseh, God reveals that the covenant inheritance has legal pathways for preserving a house when the visible line appears broken. The ordinary expectation of sons is not denied as a norm, but the absence of sons does not mean the father's name must be cut off.

Numbers 27:8-11

And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter. And if he have no daughter, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his brethren. And if he have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his father's brethren. And if his father have no brethren, then ye shall give his inheritance unto his kinsman that is next to him of his family, and he shall possess it: and it shall be unto the children of Israel a statute of judgment, as the LORD commanded Moses.

The ruling becomes a statute of judgment. The case of Zelophehad's daughters produces instruction for Israel. This is not a temporary kindness limited to five women. Their case becomes a legal witness for how inheritance is preserved when ordinary succession fails.

12. Numbers 36: Preservation Without Tribal Confusion#

Numbers 36 adds the balancing guardrail. The heads of the fathers of the family of the children of Gilead, of the sons of Machir, son of Manasseh, raise a related concern. If the daughters marry into another tribe, the inheritance may transfer away from Manasseh. The original preservation ruling could create tribal confusion if not guarded.

Numbers 36:3

And if they be married to any of the sons of the other tribes of the children of Israel, then shall their inheritance be taken from the inheritance of our fathers, and shall be put to the inheritance of the tribe whereunto they are received: so shall it be taken from the lot of our inheritance.

This concern is not dismissed. It shows that preserved inheritance must not become disorder. God preserves the endangered house while also preserving tribal allotment. Mercy and order are not enemies. Restoration and boundary are not enemies. Inheritance can be preserved without erasing the structure of inheritance.

Numbers 36:5-6

And Moses commanded the children of Israel according to the word of the LORD, saying, The tribe of the sons of Joseph hath said well. This is the thing which the LORD doth command concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, saying, Let them marry to whom they think best; only to the family of the tribe of their father shall they marry.

Again, the text says the sons of Joseph have spoken well. The daughters spoke right in Numbers 27. The tribe speaks well in Numbers 36. The result is not contradiction but completion. The daughters receive inheritance; the inheritance remains within the tribe of their father. Name and tribal portion are both preserved.

Numbers 36:10-12

Even as the LORD commanded Moses, so did the daughters of Zelophehad: For Mahlah, Tirzah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married unto their father's brothers' sons: And they were married into the families of the sons of Manasseh the son of Joseph, and their inheritance remained in the tribe of the family of their father.

The final result is obedience and preservation. The daughters marry within the family of the sons of Manasseh, and their inheritance remains in the tribe of the family of their father. The threatened house is not cut off; the tribal structure is not confused; the divine ruling stands.

13. Joshua 17: The Claim Becomes Possession in the Land#

Joshua 17:3-4

But Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, had no sons, but daughters: and these are the names of his daughters, Mahlah, and Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. And they came near before Eleazar the priest, and before Joshua the son of Nun, and before the princes, saying, The LORD commanded Moses to give us an inheritance among our brethren. Therefore according to the commandment of the LORD he gave them an inheritance among the brethren of their father.

Joshua 17 is the fulfillment stage inside the land. The daughters appear again. The genealogy is repeated again. Their names are repeated again. They come before Eleazar, Joshua, and the princes, not to invent a new claim, but to appeal to what the LORD commanded Moses. The commandment moves from wilderness ruling to land possession.

This matters for the Joshua thread in the larger study. Joshua, the faithful Ephraimite, distributes inheritance. In the case of Zelophehad's daughters, Joshua participates in the implementation of God's preserved-inheritance ruling within Manasseh. The Ephraimite Joshua does not only lead conquest and appoint refuge. He also stands in the inheritance-distribution process where Manasseh's threatened house receives possession.

Joshua 17:5-6

And there fell ten portions to Manasseh, beside the land of Gilead and Bashan, which were on the other side Jordan; Because the daughters of Manasseh had an inheritance among his sons: and the rest of Manasseh's sons had the land of Gilead.

The text explicitly says the daughters of Manasseh had an inheritance among his sons. The preserved-inheritance witness becomes visible in the allotment. The daughters are not merely heard; they receive. The ruling is not merely theoretical; it enters the geography of promise.

14. Manasseh and Ephraim Held Together: Preservation Before Multiplication#

Manasseh and Ephraim must be held together because Joseph's double portion requires both witnesses. Manasseh is not the nations-multitude son, but he is not irrelevant. Ephraim is not the only fruit of Joseph. The sons together show a sequence: God heals the grief and preserves the threatened house; God makes fruitful in affliction and multiplies beyond natural expectation.

This sequence matters spiritually and legally. If inheritance is not preserved, multiplication may become detached from rightful possession. If multiplication is not governed by the true King, Ephraim's fruitfulness can become Hosea 10 fruitfulness: fruit unto self and multiplied altars. If preservation is isolated from fruitfulness, the house may be protected but not expanded into the full blessing. Both must be brought under God's order.

Manasseh therefore prepares the reader to understand Ephraim rightly. Ephraim's greater blessing is not permission to neglect legal preservation. Ephraim's multiplication is not self-owned. It belongs within the covenant house where names, portions, boundaries, priestly rulings, and inheritance are guarded by God.

15. Christ and the Preserved Inheritance of the Broken House#

The Manasseh witness ultimately points beyond Manasseh. The deepest problem of inheritance is not only a father dying without sons. The deeper human problem is breach, death, forfeiture, exile, guilt, and a house that cannot secure its own future. The covenant story repeatedly shows threatened lines, barren wombs, younger sons, foreign women, broken houses, and impossible continuity. God preserves the promise through unlikely legal paths.

Christ is the final answer to preserved inheritance. He is the Son who cannot lose the inheritance, the Seed through whom the promise stands, the High Priest whose death opens return, the risen Firstborn among many brethren, and the one in whom believers receive inheritance. The inheritance is not preserved by human strength, ordinary succession, or visible probability. It is preserved by God's promise and fulfilled in His Son.

Ephesians 1:11

In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

1 Peter 1:3-4

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,

The New Testament inheritance language is not detached from the Old Testament. It stands on the foundation of promise, land, portion, firstborn, birthright, priesthood, blood, refuge, covenant, and restoration. The case of Zelophehad's daughters teaches the reader that God is legally attentive to threatened inheritance. In Christ, that attentiveness reaches its fullest expression.

The broken house is not abandoned. The threatened name is not casually erased. The inheritance is not left to vanish because the visible line appears insufficient. God makes a way according to His own righteousness. That is why Manasseh belongs in the study before the Ephraim/Hosea/Ezekiel/Galilee expansion. The reader must see that God's manifold wisdom includes preservation as well as multiplication.

16. Method Guardrails for This Section#

This Section should remain grounded in direct inheritance texts. The core argument does not require pictographs, city-name strings, or speculative symbolism. Manasseh's witness is built from Genesis 41, Genesis 48, Numbers 26, Numbers 27, Numbers 36, and Joshua 17. These passages directly show Joseph's firstborn son, Jacob's blessing, the genealogical setting, the daughters' legal claim, God's ruling, the tribal guardrail, and possession in the land.

Speculative observations may be preserved elsewhere, but they should not be used to replace the legal clarity of these texts. The strongest discovery here is not hidden in a root trail. It is openly stated: the daughters speak right; the sons of Joseph speak well; the inheritance passes to the daughters; the inheritance remains in the tribe of the family of their father.

The tone should remain invitational. The goal is to make the reader realize that an inheritance-law passage they may have skipped is carrying critical information about God's character, justice, order, compassion, and preservation. The Old Testament is not boring or non-applicable. It teaches the categories by which restoration, adoption, inheritance, and fulfillment become understandable.

17. Section 5 Master Verse Reference Bank#

Manasseh's Birth and Naming#

• Genesis 41:50-52

• Genesis 46:20

Joseph's Bones and Continuing Promise#

• Genesis 50:24-26

• Exodus 13:19

• Joshua 24:32

• Hebrews 11:22

Genesis 48 and the Blessing over Both Sons#

• Genesis 48:1-22

• 1 Chronicles 5:1-2

Manasseh Genealogy and Census#

• Numbers 26:28-34

• Joshua 17:1-2

• 1 Chronicles 7:14-19

Zelophehad's Daughters and the Legal Claim#

• Numbers 27:1-11

Preserving Tribal Inheritance#

• Numbers 36:1-12

Possession under Joshua#

• Joshua 17:3-6

Inheritance Fulfilled in Christ#

• Ephesians 1:3-14

• Colossians 1:12-14

• Hebrews 9:15

• 1 Peter 1:3-5

• Revelation 21:7

18. Transitional Closing for Section 5#

Manasseh is not the forgotten half of Joseph's double portion. His name begins with God healing Joseph's affliction and relieving the wound of toil and family rupture. His place in Genesis 48 is lower than Ephraim's but still blessed. Jacob says he also shall become a people and also shall be great. Therefore the study must not pass him over.

The daughters of Zelophehad bring Manasseh's witness into sharp legal focus. A father dies in the wilderness. He has no sons. His daughters do not deny sin, death, or wilderness judgment, but they ask why their father's name should be done away from among his family because he has no son. Moses brings their cause before the LORD, and the LORD says they speak right. The inheritance is preserved.

Numbers 36 then adds order. The inheritance must not be lost from the tribe. The daughters receive possession, and the inheritance remains in the family of their father. Joshua 17 then shows the commandment becoming possession in the land. The preserved-inheritance ruling is not theory; it enters the allotment.

This prepares the next movement of the study. Ephraim will carry the greater fruitfulness word, the multitude-of-nations thread, and the later prophetic tension of corrupted fruitfulness. But before fruitfulness is studied in its expansion and corruption, Manasseh has shown that God preserves inheritance when the normal visible line appears broken. The house is not cut off. The name is not casually erased. The portion is not lost. God's legal wisdom makes a way.

The next Section can now enter Hosea 10 and 11 with a better foundation. Ephraim's fruitfulness will be exposed as corrupted when turned inward and multiplied into false worship, but God's covenant heart toward Ephraim will also be heard: He taught Ephraim to walk, drew him with cords of love, and asked, 'How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?' Manasseh has shown preservation. Hosea will show corrupted fruitfulness and the God who refuses to abandon the house He intends to restore.