Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ don't all agree on everything. Non-Jews tend not to realize that the legitimate (non-selective) practice of Tor•âhꞋ as taught by the Pᵊrush•imꞋ — which included RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and the 1^st-century Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit Din — is defined by non-selective observance of Tor•âhꞋ, which includes Tor•âhꞋ shë-BᵊalꞋ Pëh (namely, Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ). So the big question usually isn't so much what Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ may or may not do or believe as it is what one may or may not do and believe in the legitimate practice of Tor•âhꞋ. Only thereafter is it germane whether it also falls within the subset definition of Orthodox Tor•âhꞋ practice as taught by RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and the 1^st-century Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit Din. What Orthodox practice of Tor•âhꞋ permits is far more germane to most non-Jews than any minor variances within various sects of Orthodox Judaism (such as the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ). Ultra-Orthodox / Kha•reid•imꞋ are growing increasingly radical and, accordingly, irrelevant.

Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ are constrained within the limits of Orthodox Biblical Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ maintained by RibꞋi Yᵊho•shuꞋa and the 1^st-century Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit Din, preserved and represented most pristinely in the modern world by Tei•mân•iꞋ (Yemenite) Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ, and preserved and promulgated in this light by the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit Din. Therefore, the answer to your question would depend upon whether the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ Beit Din consider your views about Biblical prophecies (or anything else) to be entirely within this definition of Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ, or whether some of your view(s) protrude(s) outside of this boundary which defines the Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ. Obviously, being outside of the definition of Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ precludes being a Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ.

For example, the Church maintains that the promises of Biblical prophecy accrue to gentiles as the "true (spiritual) Israel" and the "true Jews." This is Displacement Theology entirely incompatible with Tor•âhꞋ shë-BᵊalꞋ Pëh. It also intractably conflicts with the halakhic definition of who is a Jew (one born of a Jewish mother or converted under Orthodox auspices). Either of these reasons, therefore, necessitates prohibiting Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ from holding this view – and, conversely, anyone who holds this view from being a Nᵊtzâr•imꞋ.

A related view, advocated by a few fringe Orthodox Jews who fail to grasp its Displacement Theology ramifications, is that non-Jews (or some non-Jews) comprise Biblical "Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim." Given the expression of your previous interest in this subject I suspect this is the crux of your question. The leap from this flawed premise to the conclusion that (these) non-Jews are therefore the recipients of promises in Biblical prophecy is non sequitur and intractably incompatible with the legitimate practice of Tor•âhꞋ.

First, the premise is flawed because geneticists and statisticians have demonstrated that there have been so many generations between our generation and Biblical personalities that virtually everyone on earth has some line of ancestry which traces back to Av•râ•hâmꞋ or Ya•a•qovꞋ – or Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim. If we round off to 3,000 intervening years, and estimate 150 generations that works out to each person on earth having approximately 2-with-90-zeros-after-it ancestors during the time of the Biblical personalities. That’s more people than existed on the earth at that time, necessarily implying overlap. So the likelihood that one of any living person’s 2¹⁵⁰ ancestors was Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim (or Av•râ•hâmꞋ or Ya•a•qovꞋ or any other ancient personality) approaches certainty. But that doesn’t make every living person a Jew nor imply that every living person is the recipient of Biblical promises.

Moreover, even if the premise were true the reasoning is non sequitur because within 3-4 generations the descendents of Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim had been assimilated into the Syrian and surrounding pagan cultures – no longer meeting the criteria of Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim or Israel or, to use the more recent term, Jews by the halakhic definition.

Furthermore, history recorded the fulfillment of the prophecy regarding Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim when all of the faithful remnants of Israel, including Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim, fled to Yᵊhud•âhꞋ and merged into the Yᵊhud•imꞋ.

So the bottom line is that, apart from a documented unbroken strictly maternal descendency (which no one today can show from an ancient personality), every living person’s physical descendency from Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim is irrelevant to the halakhic definition of Israel, Jew or Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim. Since it is the halakhic definition which defines the legitimate practice of Tor•âhꞋ; the ‘Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim Theory’ is, therefore, irrelevant to Biblical prophecy and promises.

The only way to identify legitimately with Israel, the Jewish community and Biblical prophecy and promises is via the halakhic definition and route. No theory about Ë•phᵊr•aꞋyim can alter that reality.