Does Queen Elizabeth II sit on a Throne Of David?

DOES QUEEN ELIZABETH II SIT ON A THRONE OF DAVID? Confusion abounds in the minds of many! What was the covenant God made with David? Was it conditional? Does David's throne exist somewhere on earth today? Here are the REAL facts about David's throne and what Irish history reveals! The truth is far more awesome than could be imagined, and makes myth, hypothesis or human reasoning pale in comparison!

John D. Keyser

The British-Israelites, represented by The Covenant Publishing Company in London and Destiny Publishers in Massachusetts, have long claimed that Queen Elizabeth II. is descended from King David of Israel and sits on his throne today. Herbert W. Armstrong -- founder of the Worldwide Church of God -- picked up on this idea in the 1920s and made it one of the principal doctrines in the Church's theology. Now dropped by the Worldwide Church of God, the idea remains alive in the Church of God International and the so-called Philadelphia Church of God.

BUT IS IT TRUE? The truth may be even more remarkable than we realize!! Is Queen Elizabeth descended from David "the man after God's own heart"? What are the REAL facts of Irish history?

Astonishing New Evidence -- David Visited Ireland!

On the Ordnance Survey maps of Ireland there is an area three miles north of Tara Hill and one and a half miles from the old Tara castle called "Dowd's Town" -- literally "DAVID'S TOWN." How did this area receive its name?

In the 29th chapter of Isaiah are some enigmatic verses that will take on a NEW MEANING in answer to this question! Notice:

Ah, ARIEL, ARIEL, THE CITY WHERE DAVID ENCAMPED! Add ye year to year, Let the FEASTS come round! Then I will distress ARIEL, And there shall be mourning and moaning...(Jewish translation).

If we go to the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, these verses take on even more meaning: Alas for the city ARIEL, which David BESIEGED. Gather ye fruits year by year; eat ye, for ye shall eat with Moab. For I will GRIEVOUSLY AFFLICT ARIEL: and her strength and her wealth shall be mine. And I will COMPASS THEE ABOUT LIKE DAVID, and will RAISE A MOUND ABOUT THEE, and SET UP TOWERS round thee. And thy words shall be brought down to the earth, and thy words shall sink down to the earth, and thy voice shall be as they that speak out of the earth, and thy voice shall be lowered to the ground. (Verses 1-4).

Herman L. Hoeh notes that this prophecy refers to the House of Israel:

The climax of the prophecy is the time of divine intervention in all human affairs. But why should the "city where David encamped" symbolize the center of government of the House of Israel today? It is NOT a fitting expression for Jerusalem and Mt. Zion, for David did more than encamp there. He DWELT AND RULED THERE! Notice further the name ARIEL. Here is a city with the name Ariel. It symbolizes the same people as does Mt. Zion in prophecy, but it is NOT Mt. Zion. It is only a place where David ENCAMPED.

Cities in early times often changed names, or were given different names, due to famous men who restored or rebuilt the sites, or to men who established the priority of their names in a genealogical line. Take for example the change of the name of Aegialea to Sicyon in Greece....Was there at TARA a famous king with the name of Ariel whose blood line rules today in the British Royal Family? Indeed there was. Of four sons of Gede the Herimon, only the LINE OF IRIAL (Irish for Ariel) continued to rule from Tara. His name was as RARE in Irish history as the name DAVID was in Jewish history!

These scant evidences of history are more than mere coincidence. NO OTHER PLACE ON EARTH bears the names of Eber, of Dan, of David, of Ariel. -- Compendium of World History. Vol. I. Ambassador College, Pasadena, CA. 1963. Pp. 426-427. If we study the king lists in the Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland, by the Four Masters, we find that the sixth Milesian king of Ireland was named IRIAL Faidh. He ruled from 1414 B.C. to 1404 B.C., and was the first of the Irish kings to FORTIFY AND BUILD EMBANKMENTS around the city of Tara. He also cleared the plains and built forts throughout the land. Because of his fame, Tara was named after him for a period of time.

Obviously then, this city of Ariel was the city of Tara -- the city which King David besieged! It is no accident that the area three miles from the hill of Tara in Ireland is known as "David's Town" or the "Settlement of David."

Now, if we examine the annals of Ireland we find ruling, in Ireland, AT THE SAME TIME AS KING DAVID OF ISRAEL, a famous king called OLLAMH FODHLA. In an article entitled Was Ollamh Fodhla King David of Israel?, I give convincing evidence that this Ollamh Fodhla was none other than King David of Israel! According to most of the histories the name Ollamh Fodhla means the "Ollamh" or chief POET of "Fodhla" or Ireland. However, the word Ollamh -- pronounced "Ollav" -- bears a striking resemblance to the Hebrew word "olam" which means "forever" or "everlasting." Could not "Ollamh" Fodhla, then, mean "The Everlasting One of Ireland"? Could this be a reference to David who was a TYPE of Christ -- the Everlasting One? Is this just a coincidence? This Ollamh Fodhla was the most famous king in Irish history; and he established institutions in the land which brought peace and prosperity to the people of Ireland. Thomas Moore, in his book The History of Ireland, reveals how OUTSTANDING this king was:

Among the numerous kings that, in this dim period of Irish history, pass like shadows before our eyes, THE ROYAL SAGE, OLLAMH FODHLA, is almost the ONLY ONE who, from the strong light of tradition thrown round him, STANDS OUT as being of historical substance and truth. It would serve to illustrate the nature and extent of the evidence with which the world is sometimes satisfied, to collect together the various celebrated names which are received as authentic on the strength of tradition alone; and FEW, perhaps, could claim a more virtual title to this privilege than the GREAT LEGISLATOR of the ancient Irish, OLLAMH FODHLA....(Longman, Brown, Green & Longmans, London. 1846. P. 110.)

In The Story of the Irish Race we see how accomplished this king really was: "The legends indicate that he was a TRUE FATHER to his people, and an ABLE STATESMAN. He organised the nation for efficiency -- dividing it into cantred, appointing a chief over every cantred, a brugaid (magistrate) over every territory, and a steward over every townland. Some traditions say that he established a School of Learning. And as a CROWNING GLORY he established the celebrated Feis [FEAST] of Tara, the great triennial Parliament of the chiefs, the nobles, and the scholars of the nation, which assembled on TARA HILL once every three years to settle the nation's affairs. This great deliberative assembly, almost UNIQUE AMONG THE NATIONS in those early ages, and down into Christian times, reflected not little glory upon ancient Ireland." (Seumas MacManus. The Devin-Adair Company, N.Y. 1949. P.15.)

This great feast of Tara fell in the FALL of the year and lasted for SEVEN DAYS! Some of the Irish annals state that the Feast of Tara, as established by Ollamh Fodhla, was held EVERY YEAR during his reign, and after his death was reduced to every three years -- finally falling into disuse. This yearly feast in the fall could only be the Feast of Tabernacles!

Does the line of this Ollamh Fodhla (or David) reach down to Queen Elizabeth today -- uninterrupted and undiluted? Could Queen Elizabeth, after all, be descended from David by way of the line of Ollamh Fodhla? After the death of Ollamh Fodhla, four of his sons ruled in succession over the land; then the throne went to Bearnghal, grandson of Ollamh Fodhla through his son Gedhe Ollghothach. Gedhe was a warlike monarch; and there was continual fighting during his rule which led to a great scarcity of food throughout Ireland. After ruling for twelve years Bearnghal was slain by his cousin Oilioll (son of Slanoll, the second reigning son of Ollamh Fodhla) in a CIVIL WAR that was supported by SIRNA OF THE HOUSE OF HEREMON, who was paving the way for his own takeover of the throne.

Did the end come to Ollamh Fodhla's line when Oilioll was killed by this Sirna (son of Dian) in the sixteenth year of his (Oilioll's) reign? The "Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland" reveal that "It was this Sirna, son of Dian, that WRESTED the government of Teamhair [Tara] from the ULTA [line of Ollamh Fodhla]." Of this same event, the Annals of Clonmacnoise say that "Oilell was king 15 years, and then was slain by Siorna [Sirna] Mac Deyn (of the SEPT OF HEREMON), who was he that VIOLENTLY TOOK THE GOVERNMENT OF THE SCEPTRE OF THIS LAND FROM THE SEPT OF ULSTER."

Some claim that a daughter of Ollamh Fodhla (David) -- or one of his sons or grandsons -- married into the line of Heremon, thus healing the breach and making it possible for Queen Elizabeth to be descended from David. There is NO EVIDENCE of this ever happening, however. In our article, "Joseph of Arimathea and David's Throne in Britain" we show WHERE the breach was healed.

JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA AND DAVID'S THRONE IN BRITAIN!

We get a fleeting glimpse in the New Testament. This great man of God strides onto center- stage, commands our attention for a few brief verses then, just as quickly, disappears -- never to be heard from again! Yet this man, whose life is just as fascinating or as intriguing as that of Paul or Peter, performed a VITAL MISSION in the plan of God! As a close relative of Christ Himself, Joseph of Arimathea carried the Pharez branch of the royal line of Judah to the tin islands of Britain where it merged with the line of Zarah already present in the islands. Read how the two lines merged in the person of the famous King Arthur and NOT by a fictitious marriage between a daughter of King Zedekiah and the Irish prince Heremon.

By John D. Keyser

Matthew records in chapter 27: "Now when evening had come, there came A RICH MAN from Arimathea, named JOSEPH, Who himself had also become A DISCIPLE OF JESUS. This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded the body to be given to him. And when JOSEPH had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth, and laid it in his new tomb which he had hewn out of the rock; and he rolled a large stone against the door of the tomb, and departed." (Verses 57-60, NKJV).

With these words Joseph of Arimathea disappears from the pages of the Bible. The other gospels cover the SAME EVENTS, adding details that Matthew doesn't mention.

We read in Mark: Now when evening had come, because it was the Preparation Day, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea, a PROMINENT COUNCIL MEMBER, who was himself WAITING FOR THE KINGDOM OF GOD, coming in and taking courage, went in to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Pilate marveled that He was already dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him if He had been dead for some time. And when he found out from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph. Then he bought fine linen, took Him down, and wrapped Him in the linen. And he laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock, and rolled a stone against the door of the tomb. -- Verses 42-46, NKJV.

Luke adds little that is not covered by Matthew and Mark: "And behold, there was a man named Joseph, A COUNCIL MEMBER, A GOOD AND JUST MAN. HE HAD NOT CONSENTED TO THEIR COUNSEL AND DEED. He was from Arimathea, a city of the Jews, who himself was also waiting for the kingdom of God. This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a tomb that was hewn out of the rock, where no one had ever lain before." (Luke 23:50-53, NKJV).

John, the apostle of love, tells us a little more: After this, Joseph of Arimathea, being a DISCIPLE OF JESUS, BUT SECRETLY, FOR FEAR OF THE JEWS, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus; and Pilate gave him permission. So he came and took the body of Jesus. And NICODEMUS, who at first came to Jesus by night, also came bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds. Then they took the body of Jesus, and bound it in strips of linen with the spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury. Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. So there they laid Jesus, because of the Jews' Preparation Day, for the tomb was nearby.-- John 19:38-42, NKJV.

To most readers of the Bible, therefore, Joseph of Arimathea is remembered in passing as the rich man who took the body of Christ down from the tree and placed it in his own private sepulcher. He then silently passes out of the Scriptural record leaving no trace whatsoever in the Word of God!

As E. Raymond Capt notes: "Strangely, the Bible has nothing further to say about Joseph of Arimathea, following the crucifixion. Surely this man who was a disciple of Jesus; who had shown rare courage in begging the body of Jesus, would have become a close follower of Christ after the transforming experience at Pentecost. The Bible never mentions him again, yet we are not left in the dark concerning the DOMINANT ROLE Joseph played in the spreading of Christianity." (The Traditions of Glastonbury. Artisan Sales, Thousand Oaks, CA. 1983. P.21). WHO was this man who, in all probability, risked the wrath of the Jewish authorities when he requested the body of Christ for burial?

All four of the gospels state that he was "a disciple of Jesus" who was himself "waiting for the kingdom of God." John adds that Joseph was a disciple of Jesus "secretly, for fear of the Jews." It is obvious, then, that Joseph of Arimathea was well aware of the person and ministry of Christ in his homeland and, in order to protect his standing and business interests, was a "secret" disciple of Jesus. The religious hierarchy of the day, made up of the Pharisees and Sadducees, could have easily ruined Joseph if they were aware of his religious affiliation. Therefore Joseph chose, at this time, to keep his connection with Christ secret. However, there is more to Joseph's connection with Christ than meets the eye!

Luke mentions that Joseph was a COUNCIL MEMBER, and Mark adds "PROMINENT" to the term council member. This would indicate that he was a member of the GREAT COUNCIL or SANHEDRIN of the Jews -- the supreme national tribunal established at the time of the Maccabees, or perhaps earlier in the time of Ezra.

That Joseph was present at the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin is evident by Luke's comment that Joseph "had not consented to their counsel and deed." In fact, there is evidence that Joseph of Arimathea led an impassioned defense of Christ at the trial. In the crowded assembly of the Sanhedrin, Christ was led to face Caiaphas and his father-in-law Annas who, as the reigning High Priest of Judaism, represented the Sadducean families of which they were members. George F. Jowett relates what transpired:

Contrary to the common belief that Jesus was completely surrounded by enemies at that strange midnight trial, the light of recent findings prove it to have been very much otherwise.

The British Tin Industry

In the Latin Vulgate of the Gospel of Mark (15:43) and Luke (23:50) we find the term "DECURIO" used instead of "COUNCIL MEMBER" to describe Joseph's office or occupation. In Jerome's (Catholic scholar, 345?-420 A.D.) translation of the Vulgate the term "NOBILIS DECURIO" is used -- the NOBLE DECURIO!

Not only that, but early documents of Britain and Gaul refer to Joseph in the same manner. The Welshman Maelgwyn of Llandaff calls Joseph the "NOBILIS DECURIO," as well as Rabanus Maurus (776-856 A.D.), Archbishop of Mayence and writer of the manuscript called the Life of St. Mary Magdalene.

A copy of this document is to be found in the Magdalen College Library at Oxford, England, and dates from the early part of the fifteenth century. No history is known of this manuscript; but it is neatly written on parchment and beautifully illuminated in colors and in gold. Experts note that the writing and illumination is very similar to that of the manuscript copy of the Tertius Opus of Roger Bacon in the Bodleian Library of the University of Oxford, which is generally considered to date from the end of the fourteenth or beginning of the fifteenth century.

It is abundantly clear that this copy of the Life of St. Mary from Rabanus' original is written by a professional scribe. The careful "illumination," the various copying errors, and the fact that at the end of the manuscript the writer goes on to transcribe a homily (sermon) of Origen (the celebrated writer, teacher and theologian of antiquity) on Mary Magdalen, lends credence to this being a faithful copy of the original.

In the 22nd chapter of this manuscript an account of the embalming and burial of Christ by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus is related, along with a detailed description of the mausoleum and sepulcher that Joseph had hewn out of the rock for his own use. Then the manuscript states that Joseph was known as the NOBILIS DECURION. Gildas Badonicus ( 516- 570 A.D.), one of the earliest British historians, also refers to Joseph as "NOBILIS DECURIO." What does this Latin title mean?

In the Roman Empire of the time of Christ, the term "DECURIO" was commonly used to designate AN OFFICIAL -- UNDER ROMAN AUTHORITY -- WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF METAL MINING. The implication is that Joseph was a PROVINCIAL ROMAN SENATOR in charge of Rome's overseas mining interests. Ivor C. Fletcher adds that "the office seems to have been a lucrative and much coveted one. Cicero [Roman writer, statesman and orator (106-43 B.C.)] remarked that it was easier to become a Senator of Rome than a DECURIO in Pompeii." (The Incredible History of God's True Church. Triumph Publishing Co., Altadena, CA. 1984. P.54). The office of Decurio is also known to have existed UNDER THE ROMAN ADMINISTRATION IN BRITAIN!

It is an historical fact that TIN was mined and exported to the European continent in large quantities from CORNWALL, ENGLAND, during the Roman period (Funk & Wagnalls New Encyclopedia, vol. 23. Pp. 163-164). The Encyclopedia Britannica reports that "tin was IMPORTED FROM CORNWALL INTO ITALY after, if not before, the invasion of Britain by Julius Caesar. (1943 edition. Vol. 22, p.233). The tin mines of Cornwall were a major source of this metal; and in Roman times the metal was IN GREAT DEMAND because tin was used in the making of alloys.

In Polwhele's History of Cornwall (Falmouth, 1803) we read that "the OLDEST smelting-places are called 'JEWS' HOUSES,' the old blocks of tin occasionally found are called 'JEWS' PIECES,' and the stream works of tin that have been formerly deserted by the labourers are called 'JEWS' WORKS' or 'ATTALL SARACEN.' The JEWS appear to have called themselves, or were called by the Britons of Cornwall, 'SARACENS.' "

All through the land of Cornwall the ancient presence and influence of the JEWS is marked by names and places like "BOJEWYAN" (ABODE OF THE JEWS), "TREJEWAS" (JEWS' VILLAGE) and "MARKET JEW." These, as well as the historical "JEWISH WINDOWS" in St. Neot's church and other Jewish monuments and memories, abundantly supplement the older traditions of the "JEWS' HOUSES" and "JEWS' LEAVINGS." The Encyclopedia Britannica (1943 edition) notes that "the wealth of CORNWALL...lies not so much in the soil, as UNDERGROUND and in the surrounding sea. Hence the favourite Cornish toast, "fish, tin and copper." The tin of Cornwall has been known and worked FROM THE BRONZE AGE. By ancient charters the "TINNERS" were exempt from all jurisdiction (save in cases affecting land, life and limb) other than that of the Stannary Courts, and peculiar laws were enacted in the Stannary parliaments. A TAX on the tin, after smelting, was paid to the earls and dukes of Cornwall." (Vol.6, p.453).

What does all this have to do with Joseph of Arimathea? Just this: Along with the traditions of Jewish presence in Cornwall, THERE ARE TRADITIONS OF JOSEPH having visited the area in the course of his mining business. Fragments of poems and miners' songs, handed down through the centuries, make FREQUENT REFERENCE TO JOSEPH. One refrain runs, "Joseph was a tin man, Joseph was in the tin trade." (Cornwall, by S. Baring-Gould, p.57). In the Guide to Penzance, Land's End and Scilly, the author states that "there is a traditional story that JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA was connected with MARAZION [a small seaport of Cornwall -- 2 miles east of Penzance] when he and other Jews traded with the ancient tin-miners of Cornwall" (5th edition, Ward, Lock and Co., London).

Is it really so incredible that Joseph of Arimathea had commercial interests in the British Isles -- the Cassiterides or "Tin-Islands" of the ancient world? After all SENECA, the Roman philosopher, dramatist and statesman who was appointed tutor to Nero and had great influence with the emperor, amassed great wealth as a result of his business interests and investments in Britain. Unfortunately, Seneca obtained his vast fortune by trickery and promoting usurious loans to the British. Joseph, on the other hand, was impeccably honest in all his business transactions. Virtually all the early records and traditions concerning Joseph ASSOCIATE HIM WITH THE MINING ACTIVITIES OF CORNWALL AND THE MENDIP HILLS OF SOMERSET!

"The Royal Link"

Some early historical manuscripts refer to Joseph as "Joseph de MARMORE" as well as "Joseph of Arimathea." "Mar" is an Eastern term for LORD and "more" or "mawe" signifies GREAT. Therefore, his title would mean "the Great Lord Joseph of Arimathea" -- a title that has great significance, as we shall soon see!

WHY would Joseph be given such a title in the manuscripts? WHY would he be called "the Great Lord Joseph of Arimathea"? BECAUSE HE WAS OF THE ROYAL LINE DESCENDED FROM KING DAVID, and this title was in keeping with his birth as A PRINCE OF THE HOUSE OF DAVID! That makes him related to Christ!

Ivor C. Fletcher reveals why this is apparent: The gospel record of Joseph burying the body of Jesus in his own sepulchre STRONGLY SUPPORTS THIS TRADITION. A casual reading of the account would lead one to assume that Joseph claimed the body from Pilate on the grounds of being a friend or follower of the dead man. This is far from the case, however. The chief priests, with the permission of Pilate, had made special arrangements regarding the security of the body of Jesus for the express purpose of keeping it out of the hands of His followers (Matt. 27:62-66).

We are told that Joseph did not reveal at that time that he was a follower of Jesus. He was a disciple "secretly for fear of the Jews" (John 19:38).

If Joseph did not approach Pilate on the grounds of being a disciple, WHAT EXACTLY WAS HIS STATUS?

The only grounds which he could have had which would be in agreement with Jewish AND Roman law and at the same time avoid giving offence to the chief priests, would be as THE NEAREST RELATIVE OF THE DEAD MAN.

With that pronouncement Fletcher continues: Under both Jewish and Roman Law it was the responsibility of the NEAREST RELATIVES to dispose of the dead, regardless of the circumstances of death. Mary, the mother of Jesus, would clearly be in no fit emotional state for such a task, which would have been considered "man's work" anyway. The brothers of Jesus as young men or teenagers would have lacked the maturity to perform such a duty, LEAVING JOSEPH (ACCORDING TO TRADITION THE UNCLE OF MARY) THE NEXT IN LINE.

Unless Joseph had STRONG LEGAL GROUNDS, as described, for claiming the body, the Jews would have RESISTED the idea of a man -- whom they hated and had caused to be executed -- given the honour of being buried in a private sepulchre, instead of the official burial place for criminals. The last time that Joseph, the legal FATHER of Jesus, is mentioned in scripture is when Jesus is twelve years old (Luke 2:44-52). From then on the Bible speaks only of His mother and brothers. The clear implication is that Joseph died when Jesus was a young man or teenager. The people of his home town of Nazareth asked the question, "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary? (Mark 6:3). A son would only be spoken of in this way if the father were dead.

Under Jewish law THE NEAREST MALE RELATIVE would have the clear responsibility to assist the widow and her children. As we saw earlier, this role would almost certainly be taken up by JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA. -- The Incredible History of God's True Church. Pp.53-54.

E. Raymond Capt also shows that it had to be a RELATIVE who claimed the body of Christ: It is quite obvious that the husband (Joseph the widower and carpenter) of Mary died while Jesus was young. Under both ROMAN AND HEBREW LAW, the NEXT MALE KIN automatically becomes the LEGAL GUARDIAN of the family. In this case it was Joseph of Arimathea.... We also cannot overlook the fact that Joseph "went in BOLDLY unto Pilate...and (Pilate) gave the body to Joseph." (Mark 15:43-45) The Sanhedrin had declared Jesus a criminal. According to both ROMAN AND JEWISH LAW, unless the body of an executed criminal was immediately claimed BY THE NEXT OF KIN, the body of the victim was cast into a common pit, where as with others, all physical record of them was completely obliterated. Certainly, the fanatical Sadducean element of the Sanhedrin who sought the total extinction of Jesus, even in death, would have allowed NOTHING SHORT OF A LEGAL CLAIM on the body of Christ. -- The Traditions of Glastonbury, pp.19-20.

We must also realize that Joseph of Arimathea was a man whom the Sadducees DARED NOT OPPOSE without running up against the Roman administration of the land. Joseph's influence was so great it stretched beyond the borders of Judea into the upper echelons of Roman authority. The Sadducees, therefore, had to defer to Joseph's claim. Joseph's act of claiming the body of Christ made him a MARKED MAN, and the hatred of the Sadducees toward him must have been surpassed only by their hatred of Jesus. Also, we must remember, it was Joseph who led the defense of Jesus before the Sanhedrin. This did not win him too many points with the Jewish authorities!

Ancient traditions, held close to the heart of the Eastern Church, claim that Joseph was related to Christ and was, in fact, His GREAT-UNCLE! The Jewish TALMUD states that Joseph was the YOUNGER BROTHER OF THE FATHER OF MARY, and therefore was her uncle and a GREAT-UNCLE TO JESUS. George F. Jowett, in his book The Drama of the Lost Disciples, also states that "according to the Talmud, Joseph was the YOUNGER BROTHER OF THE FATHER OF THE VIRGIN MARY. He was her uncle, and therefore a great-uncle to Jesus." (P.18). The Harlein Manuscripts in the British Museum (38-59f, 193b) further support the claims that Joseph of Arimathea was uncle to Mary the mother of Jesus. One of the manuscripts adds that he had a daughter, ANNA, calling her "consobrina" or COUSIN OF MARY. In the High History of the Holy Grail it plainly states that "Joseph was his [Christ's] mother's uncle" and "this Joseph, as the Scripture witnesseth, was his [Christ's] UNCLE" (Appendix M, The Coming of the Saints, by J.W. Taylor. P.245). This explains the close relationship Christ had with Joseph of Arimathea.

When Joseph of Arimathea went to Pilate to claim the body of Christ, he really sealed his fate as far as the Sanhedrin was concerned. It was bad enough when Joseph defended Christ before the hastily assembled group of Jewish leaders; now he was rubbing salt into an already festering wound! Jesus was charged by the Jewish authorities with the most heinous of crimes -- that of BLASPHEMY (see Matt. 26:65). This meant that Christ was looked upon by the Sanhedrin as "accursed of God"; and Joseph, because of his long association with Him and the "heresy" He promoted, was looked upon in a similar vein.

Joseph's audience with Pilate to retrieve Christ's body was, in the eyes of the Sanhedrin, a slap in the face and perceived as a defilement of Jewish law. Because Christ was considered "accursed of God," even the instrument of death and the very soil it stood in was defiled. The apostle Paul said that the TREE (the stauros) Christ died on was reckoned "a shame" (Hebrew 12:2) and he called the crosspiece (Latin -- patibulum) "the reproach" -- see Hebrews 13:13. In other words, all the instruments of death were "accursed" because they came into contact with the "accursed one" -- Christ! How this was dealt with by the Jewish authorities is explained by Ernest L. Martin: The essential teaching on how to CLEANSE the land of such "accursedness" is found in Deuteronomy 21:22,23, and in the previous verse 21 it says this purging was to be done by BURNING (Hebrew: bahgar). In the Old Testament example of such purging, it was thought necessary to BURN THE POSSESSIONS of such an "accursed one" because the abominable sin of the person was even TRANSFERRED TO THE THINGS OWNED BY THE SINNER (since he had touched them and this reckoned even his possessions "accursed". This was the case with the things belonging to ACHAN who sinned so grievously in the time of Joshua (Josh. 7:15, 24-26). What happened was that Achan himself was killed (with his children and animals) and all his "accursed" things were burnt up together with him. This practice of utter destruction was considered the only way to purify the land of Israel from such defilements....

To keep the land from being polluted, Christ HAD TO BE DESTROYED before sundown and the "accursed" stauros had to be burnt up so that no person could ever touch it again....

What the Jewish authorities wanted to do was to take the dead body of Christ AND the "accursed" (shameful) tree and BURN THEM UP TOGETHER just as the Israelites did with Achan in the Old Testament. -- Secrets of Golgotha. ASK Publications, Alhambra, CA 1988. Pp. 180-181.

This is WHY Joseph of Arimathea sought an urgent audience with Pilate -- he had to claim Christ's body before the Jewish authorities could burn it to ashes. In doing so, however, he fueled the anger and hatred of the religious authorities.

Following the retrieval and the resurrection of Christ, the anger of the ruling priesthood of the Sanhedrin exploded to the surface. In secret conclave they plotted and planned a campaign of unremitting persecution against the newly formed Church of God. Maliciously, they determined to exterminate or imprison all those who followed "The Way" -- and Joseph was at the top of the list! Soon a great persecution swept through the land.

The Boat Without Oars!

The time came when the Sanhedrin finally caught up with Joseph and his faithful companions. Frederic Mistral, the French Provencal poet who lived in the nineteenth century (1830-1914), relates what happened in his work called Mireio -- published in 1859.

According to this, after Saul's persecution Joseph and his companions were thrust into A BOAT WITHOUT OARS OR SAILS by the Jews, who were glad to be finally rid of them. This occurred, according to Mistral, on the coast of Palestine -- somewhere near to Mt. Carmel. Thrust into the boat with Joseph were Lazarus, Trophimus, Maximin, Cleon, Eutropius, Sidonius (Restitutus, "the man born blind"), Martial and Saturninus. Included in the boat were also Mary, wife of Cleopas; Salome; Mary Magdalene; Martha and the maid of the two latter, Marcella.

The poem relates that as the boat was drifting out to sea Sarah, the handmaid of Salome and Mary Cleopas, cast herself into the sea to join her mistress, and by the help of Salome was brought into the boat. After beating about the Mediterranean for some time, the boat drifted to THE COAST OF PROVENCE IN GAUL (FRANCE) and, following the RIVER RHONE, ARRIVED AT ARLES, which was eventually converted to Christianity by the preaching of Trophimus.

Mistral drew his material from the Provencal traditions as they live today in the scattered homesteads of the Camargue, and in the minds and hearts of all the people in the adjacent countryside.

Further information can be found in the Ecclesiastical Annals of the sixteenth century Vatican librarian, CARDINAL CAESAR BARONIUS (1538- 1609 A.D.). Baronius, an historian of great integrity who was known for his uncompromising treatment of the truth, discovered a document of great antiquity in the Vatican archives. To his fascination, the manuscript revealed that in THE YEAR 35 A.D. Joseph of Arimathea and a group of companions that included Lazarus, Mary Magdalene, Martha and a number of others, WERE CAST ADRIFT IN A BOAT from the coast of Palestine by PERSECUTING JEWS.

"In that year the party mentioned was exposed to the sea in A VESSEL WITHOUT SAILS OR OARS. The vessel drifted finally TO MARSEILLES and they were saved. From Marseilles JOSEPH AND HIS COMPANY PASSED INTO BRITAIN and after preaching the Gospel there, died." (Ecclesiastical Annals, under section A.D. 35). How many of the disciples were with him [JOSEPH] during HIS SHORT STAY IN GAUL it is difficult to say. It is amazing how nonchalantly the records deal with this important matter. Various existing records agree in part with the Baronius record [Annales Ecclesiastici, vol. I, p.327], naming among the occupants of the castaway boat Mary Magdalene, Martha, the handmaiden Marcella, Lazarus whom Jesus raised from the dead, and Maximin the man whose sight Jesus restored. Then non-committally the report read, 'AND OTHERS.' -- The Drama of the Lost Disciples, p.63.

A number of records state that PHILIP (one of the 12 disciples) was included in the phrase "and others." There is a wealth of uncontested testimony proving that Philip went to Gaul where he received Joseph when he arrived at Marseilles, and APPOINTED HIM APOSTLE TO BRITAIN! It is well known that a great number of converts had left Palestine during the Saulian persecution -- very probably on ships belonging to Joseph. Philip was one of them.

Not long after Joseph's arrival in southern France, a British delegation arrived at Marseilles to greet him and extend an invitation for him to return with them to Britain. The delegation was sent by KING ARVIRAGUS and, through them, he offered Joseph lands, a safe haven and protection against Roman persecution. "Arviragus was prince of the noble SILURES OF BRITAIN, in the Dukedom of Cornwall. He was the son of King Cunobelinus, THE CYMBELINE OF SHAKESPEARE FAME, and cousin to the renowned British warrior-patriot, CARADOC, whom the Romans named CARACTACUS. Together they represented the ROYAL SILURIAN DYNASTY, the most powerful warrior kingdom in Britain, FROM WHOM THE TUDOR KINGS AND QUEENS OF ENGLAND HAD THEIR DESCENT" (The Drama of the Lost Disciples, p.68).

Joseph gladly accepted the British invitation and made ready to embark for Britain with a specially chosen group of companions. Philip, it is reported, consecrated Joseph in the year 36, and from then on Joseph of Arimathea became known as "THE APOSTLE TO BRITAIN." "The Line of Pharez in Britain"

Although Joseph and his companions did not see any great number of people converted to the Truth of God during their years in Britain, God's MAIN PURPOSE for leading Joseph to the Isle of Avalon was accomplished! THE LINE OF PHAREZ, to which Joseph belonged as uncle of Christ, was TRANSFERRED TO BRITAIN (in his own person) -- which was already long the home of the line of Zarah! At a later date, the TWO LINES MERGED, thus healing the breach.

Brutus, descended from the Trojans of Troy -- who in turn were descended from Zarah -- arrived in Britain in approximately 1100 B.C. His line, strengthened over the centuries by the invading Saxons and Normans, and eventually merging with the Milesian branch of the line of Zarah in Ireland, has ruled the British Isles ever since without any major interruption.

During the time of King Zedekiah of Judah, it is claimed that Jeremiah the Prophet brought a daughter of Zedekiah to Ireland-- where she supposedly married into the line of Zarah. However, there is NO RECORD whatsoever in the ancient annals of Ireland, Scotland, Wales or England that makes mention of this ever occurring!

Various groups, including the British-Israelites and a number of the Churches of God, still cling to this erroneous tradition, completely OVERLOOKING the role Joseph of Arimathea played when he arrived in Britain during the first century of our era. That Joseph was met by a reigning king of the Zarah line when he stepped ashore in Britain should tell us something right there! God was directing the affairs of His people Israel in the islands of the sea, to bring about the healing of the breach and the fulfillment of Genesis 49:10, which says: "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh comes..."

Centuries earlier, King David of Israel visited Ireland and established his throne there under the Irish name of Ollamh Fodhla. However his line, after 137 years, apparently came to an abrupt close when a rival royal house of the line of Zarah took the throne by force. As far as history and tradition is concerned, the line of Pharez in Ireland disappeared with Oilioll -- the last king of David's line (934-918 B.C.).

Therefore, as a thorough search of the ancient records shows, it was JOSEPH -- not Jeremiah -- who planted the Davidic line of Pharez in the British Isles! Centuries later, in the time of the famous King Arthur of the Round Table, THE TWO LINES MERGED AND THE BREACH WAS HEALED!!

The story of Joseph of Arimathea, filled with adventure, drama, tragedy and immense courage, has long been overlooked by the Churches of God. This fearless man of God rightfully belongs at the leading edge of the missionary effort to spread the Word of God to all nations. He stands shoulder-to-shoulder with Paul, Peter and the others who left their indelible footprints in the far reaches of the Roman Empire and beyond.