Sighted Moon News Letter 5843-046
25th day of the Tenth month 5843 After Creation
January 5, 2008
Shabbat Shalom Family,
With this weeks News Letter we shall conclude the evidence I wanted to lay before you as to the proofs of where the Tribes of Israel went. I could have share a hundred other articles on the migrations and language similarities. Instead I choose some diverse and different teachings on it.
Next week we begin the series on the Kings of the North and the Kings of the South. There is much ignorance on this teaching of Daniel. Some have used it to scare people into following them. Because of the many false teaching out there I have had to go into great detail and having done so I too was surprised at those things I shall show you. This is going to be a good series.
Let me once again assure you, I have no group that I am trying to get you into. I have nothing to sell. I have only the truth to share and I do not care what denomination you belong to or came from. If you want the truth and can stand to learn it. Then this next series will shatter many false teaching in many different denominations. I again urge you to share this with your loved ones, your friends, and your families. They need to know. Sign them up, or send me the e-mail address and I will add them to the list. They can unsubscribe if they choose to.
My IT guy is shocked at the number who now receive this News Letter. It is only by word of mouth that people learn of it. Another group has over 100 TV stations that they air on. I have none. We are receiving just under 10,000 hits a month. They have less than half that.
Brethren, this is not my site or my work. I am not smart enough to have all this happen, that has happened here this past two years. I am privileged to be able to see it grow. As each of you shares this or signs others up. Please continue to do so.
For past issues of the News Letters you can now go direct to each one by following this link https://sightedmoon-archives.com/sightedmoon_2015/?page_id=144
The following is about Joseph of Arimathea and is one of my favorites. It still brings a tear to my eye to know all that he did and how little the world now knows of him.
Mr. Keyser has a different view on the healing of the breach which I feel Jeremiah did. But I have not edited out his views, and left them for you to ponder any way. Some may have never considered these things which is for another article.
Hope of Israel Ministries (Church of YEHOVAH):
JOSEPH OF ARIMATHEA AND DAVID’S THRONE IN BRITAIN!
We get a fleeting glimpse in the New Testament. This great man of YEHOVAH 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 YEHOVAH God! As a close relative of the Messiah 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 Yeshua. 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 the Messiah 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 YEHOVAH 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 the Messiah for burial?
A Man of Substance!
In reading these verses from the Bible we can glean a number of things. First, and foremost, is the fact that he was a RICH MAN from Arimathea. Ancient traditions note that Joseph was a man of refinement, well educated and possessing many talents. He evidently had extraordinary political and business abilities that helped him to become one of the wealthiest men in the world of that time. His financial and social standing can be estimated when we realize that he owned a palatial home in the city of Jerusalem and a country estate just outside the confines of the city. These same traditions reveal that Joseph also owned another spacious estate several miles north of Jerusalem at ARIMATHEA — which is known today as Ramalleh.
Ramalleh was the birthplace of Samuel the prophet and is called, in the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament, Arimathaim. This town was located on the busy caravan route between Nazareth and the Holy City, and may therefore have been a large factor in Joseph’s choice of a profession. All the information we have about Joseph indicates that he was a man of unusual business abilities within the Jewish and Roman trading circles of his day.
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 Yeshua “secretly, for fear of the Jews.” It is obvious, then, that Joseph of Arimathea was well aware of the person and ministry of the Messiah in his homeland and, in order to protect his standing and business interests, was a “secret” disciple of Yeshua. 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 the Messiah secret. However, there is more to Joseph’s connection with the Messiah 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 Yeshua 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 the Messiah at the trial. In the crowded assembly of the Sanhedrin, the Messiah 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.
That Jesus was encompassed by a vengeful, hostile group who sought His total extinction is substantiated, but THE BRILLIANT BATTLE FOR THE DEFENCE against the savage demands for destruction has, unfortunately, never been sufficiently reported. Today, we know the trial for life was fought out on the floor of the Sanhedrin with all the stormy violence of a bestial, prejudiced fury on one side and the granite uncompromising courage of the defence by men who knew that by the very act of their challenge they had signed and sealed their own death warrant. — The Drama of the Lost Disciples. Covenant Publishing Co. Ltd., London. 1980. P.13.
Jowett goes on to say that “on this particular occasion we see the opposition potent with prejudice, slashing at Christ with their verbal darts, subtly fanning the flame of antagonism against Him. On the other side, we see the champions of the defence striking back with rapier swiftness. The history of the Trial, as it has come down to us, shows that the defence fought back with all the resolute heroism of fearless warriors, invincible in the courage of their firm convictions.”
The defense of the Messiah by Joseph and those who supported him must have been brilliant, and a classic in the legal annals of Judea at the time. When the vote was cast, forty out of the seventy-one legislative members of the Sanhedrin voted for the dismissal of the case and the freedom of the Messiah. This the Sadducees never forgot. They controlled all the wealthy ruling families of Jerusalem and the surrounding areas — with the exception of the intrepid Joseph! His influence was so great that it stretched beyond the boundaries of Jewish politics into the high places of Roman administration. “He is the man who at this stage of events quietly moves into the scene. He was the power behind the throne who backed up the exhortations of the Liberal Party in the Sanhedrin, and the man who stood behind the defence of Jesus with his resourceful support on that fateful night.” (Ibid., p.15).
At this point Caiaphas demanded that Yeshua be tried before Pontius Pilate, the Roman Procurator of the Roman Province of Palestine, on the charge of treason. What happened next is recorded in the pages of the Bible.
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.
As J.W. Taylor notes, “the original work of which this is a copy was undoubtedly written either by Rabanus himself, or its author must have made considerable use of the Homilies of Rabanus, for the general style and composition of the work (as M. Faillon has well shown) CLOSELY FOLLOWS that of its reputed author.” (The Coming of the Saints, p.81).
The book in the Magdalen College Library has been recognized as a work of Rabanus in past centuries, and appears as such in the well-known list or catalog of William cave (Scriptorum Ecclesiastiicorum Historia Literaria, vol.ii, p.38 Oxford, 1740-1743).
In the 22nd chapter of this manuscript an account of the embalming and burial of the Messiah 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 the Messiah, 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 his book entitled Roman Britain, I.A. Richmond tells of the development and growth of the British tin industry and trade with the continent of Europe:
Much of the most famed of British metals in the days before the Roman occupation was TIN. The vivid accounts by Diodorus Siculus [1st century B.C. Greek historian], of overland pack-horse transport of CORNISH TIN from the Gallic [French] coast to Narbo (Narbonne) in the FIRST CENTURY B.C., and of the ISLAND EMPORIUM ON THE BRITISH COAST, from which merchants obtained it, all speak of a brisk and flourishing early trade, monopolized in Caesar’s day by the Beneti of Brittany. — Page 156.
Diodorus Siculus himself, in book V of his history of the world, details the British tin industry:
They that inhabit THE BRITISH PROMONTORY OF BELERIUM [old name for Cornwall], by reason of their converse with merchants, are more civilized and courteous to strangers than the rest. THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE THE TIN, which with a great deal of care and labour they dig out of the ground; and that being rocky, the metal is mixed with some veins of earth, out of which they melt the metal and then refine it. Then they beat it into four square pieces like a die and carry it TO A BRITISH ISLE, near at hand, CALLED ICTIS. For at low tide, all being dry between them and the island, they convey over in carts ABUNDANCE OF TIN. But there is one thing that is peculiar to these islands which lie between Britain and Europe: for at full sea they appear to be islands, but at low water for a long way they look like so many peninsulas. Hence the merchants transport the tin they buy of the inhabitants of Gaul, and for thirty days’ journey they carry it in packs upon horses’ backs THROUGH GAUL TO THE MOUTH OF THE RIVER RHONE.
And again:
This TIN METAL is transported OUT OF BRITAIN INTO GAUL, the merchants carrying it on horse-back THROUGH THE HEART OF CELTICA TO MARSEILLES and the city called NARBO. — Diodorus Siculus, Booth’s translation, vol.i, p.311.
The promontory of Cornwall is rich in the remains of old mining works and debris. The Phoenicians were probably the first to utilize Cornish tin; and some mines, like the Ding-Dong Mine, can be traced to a high antiquity. The oldest crude pits containing smelted tin are called “JEWS’ HOUSES,” the tradition being that THE TIN MINES OF CORNWALL were “WROUGHT BY THE JEWS with pickaxes of holm, box and hartshorn — tools sometimes found among the rubble of such works.” These date to very remote times.
There is hardly a tin-bearing spot in Cornwall that has not been worked over by the “OLD MEN,” — as the ancient miners of the land are always called. “….upon whatever spot the OLD MINER has worked there we are told the Phoenician has been or THE JEW has mined. The existence of the terms “JEWS’ HOUSES,” “JEWS’ TIN,” “JEWS’ LEAVINGS,” “ATTALL” and “ATALL SARACEN,” prove the connection of these strangers with the Cornish miners.” (Romances of the West, by Hunt. London, 1872).
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 the Messiah!
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 the Messiah:
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 the Messiah made him a MARKED MAN, and the hatred of the Sadducees toward him must have been surpassed only by their hatred of Yeshua. Also, we must remember, it was Joseph who led the defense of Yeshua 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 the Messiah 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 YESHUA. 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 Yeshua. 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 [the Messiah’s] mother’s uncle” and “this Joseph, as the Scripture witnesseth, was his [the Messiah’s] UNCLE” (Appendix M, The Coming of the Saints, by J.W. Taylor. P.245). This explains the close relationship the Messiah had with Joseph of Arimathea.
George F. Jowett remarks on this relationship:
During the lifetime of Jesus there constantly appears reference to his association with a RELATIVE at Jerusalem. Profane history is more positive on the matter, identifying the connection with Joseph. As we study the old records we find there is a valid reason for the close association of Jesus and his family with Joseph. It is quite obvious that the husband of Mary died while Jesus was young. Under Jewish law such a circumstance automatically appointed THE NEXT MALE KIN OF THE HUSBAND, in this case Joseph, legal guardian of the family. This fact explains many things. History and tradition report Jesus, as a boy, frequently in the company of His UNCLE, particularly at the time of the religious feasts, and declares that JESUS MADE VOYAGES TO BRITAIN with Joseph in his ships. CORNISH TRADITIONS abound with this testimony and numerous ancient landmarks bear HEBREW NAMES recording these visits.
Continue Reading
Where in the Talmud is this evidence about Joseph of Arimathea? Not one english source talking about this supposed evidence ever gives the location in Talmud where this is found.