“CO-INCIDENCES”? Linking Britain with Ancient Israel
Part Two
WHY did Fergus think it so important that he be crowned on or by the Stone? WHY did Edward I think it worth removing from Scone to Westminster. The Irish and Scottish kings, Fergus and Edward himself were all descendants of Judah: in fact it is said that Edward used to boast of his descent from the Trojans! (see (j) below).
Hosea prophesied (HOS.3:4) that Israel (i.e. the ten- tribed northern kingdom of Israel) “would abide many days without a king and without a princ., and without an IMAGE etc.: “The Hebrew word used here for ‘image’ is MATSTEBAH.
This is the very same word used in Genesis 28 :18 for Jacob’s Stone of Bethel, which he set up and anointed for a pillar of witness to God’s covenant. In fact one modern translation has altered the word ‘image’ in Hosea to read ‘sacred stone’!
For once the modern version has improved the wording. This prophecy must be specific for the Northern Kingdom as the Southern Kingdom of Judah had a king in Hosea’s day.
Jacob’s death bed blessing to Joseph, when bequeathing the Birthright, included the words “from thence is the shepherd the Stone of Israel”. Now if this part of Jacob’s prophetic blessing had been given to Judah to whom the sceptre had been given, then it would clearly refer to Christ — whose earthly descent was from Judah through David, Nathan and Mary, (e.g. ‘and this stone was Christ’). BUT IT WAS NOT – it was given to Joseph with the Birthright. It is likely therefore that this refers to the Stone of Bethel which was Jacob’s most treasured possession — his stone of witness to God’s covenant with him; in fact the Stone was ‘Israel’s title deed’ to the covenant. It is logical therefore that Jacob would make the holder of the Birthright responsible for this sacred treasured symbol, which we know the Children of Israel carried faithfully with them on all their journeys.
WHY should we — the British — now possess this Stone? WHY are our monarchs all crowned upon it? WHY has this Stone so miraculously and continuously followed this Royal Line and this Throne from Zedekiah right up to the present day? Is it all co-incidence or could it be that Jacob’s Stone of Israel has — under divine contrivance — remained with “the Sceptre” that was not to “depart from Judah” — and with the Birthright that was Joseph’s and Ephraim’s?… Anyway, WHY has a piece of sandstone with two worn out rings which is of no intrinsic value been so venerated for so many centuries and generations? If all this is just legend and co-incidence and this stone has no connection with our origins… WHY?
King Edward I and the Coronation Stone
It is not generally known that when Edward I seized the Coronation Stone from the Scots he also carried off their highly treasured symbols and regalia of kingship and national sovereignty, as well as all the documents that could be found relating to Scotland’s freedom and independance.
In response to the Scot’s earnest entreaties for their return there is reason to believe that Edward at least considered returning the ‘archives’ and symbols of sovereignity, including their treasured’ White Wand or Rod’ and their ‘Rood Cross’: but He flatly refused to return the Coronation Stone. Nothing was done about it until the young Edward III came to the throne. Younger and just beginning his reign he was more ready to compromise than his grandfather Edward 1. He negotiated the Treaty of Northampton with The Bruce, and a marriage was arranged between Bruce’s son and heir and Edward’s sister. Edward III agreed to return the’Archives’ and all the other national symbols which are mentioned in the Treaty, but there is (conspicuously) no mention of returning the Stone
— presumably because this was ‘not negotiable’! It was reported that the citizens of London refused to allow him to consider parting with it!
Now WHY was the English King so determined to keep the Stone, and so adamant against its return; and Why were the Scots equally anxious to regain it? Both parties undoubtedly knew its history going back to its association with the Irish kings, but this has — ostensibly — little to do with England. The English kings must have known much more about the Stone to make its acquisition so very important.
We believe that both parties knew where the Stone came from, and that it was Jacob’s Stone of Destiny…The Stone of Bethel.
Queen Mary I (Bloody Mary)
Yet another striking instance of the Lord’s providence and protection of Israel-Britain is demonstrated by events in the Reign of Mary I. On the grounds that the ceremony of her brother’s coronation (Edward VI) had been Protestant she refused to be crowned on King Edward I’s chair which holds the Stone of Destiny. She was crowned instead on a gilt chair that had been blessed by the Pope and brought especially from Rome. Perhaps this is why there were satanically inspired attempts to bring Britain back under the domination of the papacy and to destroy her as a nation. The first move was Mary’s marriage to King Phillip of Spain. Had there been a child of this marriage England would inevitably have fallen under Spanish and Papal domination with the papacy entrenched here for ever. Mary became pregnant and to the end it appeared to be a normal pregnancy. The fact that it was a false pregnancy and that she was barren, was nothing short of divine intervention. Her childlessness brought Protestant Queen Elizabeth to the throne. Having thus failed, the Devil made another attempt to achieve England’s conquest by Spain through the Spanish Armada! Thank God he failed again — as he will always fail. ‘The Lord blew with His winds and they were scattered! (more co-incidences?)
The Church of England Book of Common Prayer
The English Book of Common Prayer was first established in the reign of the boy King Edward VI (1549 and 1552). Originally it was largely the work of Archbishop Cranmer who is said to have included prayers that ‘had been in use in the church in England for 1500 years’. It was re-established in the reign of Elizabeth I and again in 1662 after the restoration of Charles II. It bears the marks of the work of godly men, writing as the Holy Spirit directed them — and they knew what they were doing.
In the responses we have. ..’’Endue Thy ministers with righteousness” to which we answer ‘and make Thy chosen people joyful’. And again ‘O Lord, save thy people’ we say ‘And bless Thine INHERITANCE’. When the Church — and most people — believe that the Jews are God’s chosen people and His inheritance WHY should we pray to make the Jews joyful and blessed? Remember that in the 16th century the Jews were disliked, resented and persecuted so it is unlikely that we should officially be required to intercede for them! To those who believe that the Jews are God’s chosen people these passages mean absolutely nothing. But what would they mean if the congregation were THEMSELVES God’s chosen people and HIS Inheritance? They would become highly relevant! Again to ‘give peace in our time O Lord’ we answer ‘because there is none other that fighteth for us but ‘Onlv Thou, O God’. The Bible says of Israel ‘No weapon formed against thee shall prosper…the Lord your God, He it is that fighteth for you’. This passage is addressed to the northern House of Israel. WHY do WE use it thus… Is it a co-incidence?
When Cruden’s Concordance was first published in 1761 it contained a letter to the King dated June 11th 1761 containing these words: “May the great God be the guide of your life, and direct and prosper you, so that it may be said in future ages that King George III hath been an Hezekiah to our British Israel”! Why to our ‘British Israel’ why not just to ‘Britain’?
In the Prayer Books of Queen Victoria’s reign (and also George III and IV) the prayer to be used on the anniversary of the Sovereign’s Accession ends with, “and that these blessings may be continued in after ages, let there never be one wanting in her house to succeed her in the government of this United Kingdom that posterity may see her children’s children AND PEACE UPON ISRAEL, so that we may give thanks for ever…” Why ‘peace upon Israel’? Why not ‘peace upon Britain or the U.K.’? Also compare ‘let there never be one wanting in her house to succeed her’ with Jer.33 vl 7 “Thus saith the Lord; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the House of Israel”. – Co-incidence? The prayer was discontinued later in Victoria’s reign but how did it originate in the first place?
WHY should OUR book of Common Prayer contain so many references to Israel – in fact passages which equate us with God’s Israel? We should bear in mind that the men who compiled it were directed by the Holy Spirit, and they knew very well what they were about: e.g. it was not just by chance that they included ‘The Benedictus’ – which is specifically about Israel. Do re-read its opening verses “…to perform the mercy promised to our forefathers, and to remember His Holy covenant” etc.
However, we should all be aware that satanically inspired efforts are being made (successfully too!) to remove ALL references to Israel from our worship as in the new ‘Alternative Services’ book. Passages in which hitherto we have sung or prayed as if we were God’s people are altered or omitted. (Everyone should read the excellent booklet ‘Questions of Today’ by Mrs.Joyce Harper.)
Similarily, in present day Christian Church and Evangelical teaching the Old Testament and the Prophets are given absolutely minimal attention. The gospel of the Kingdom – to which Christ gave such emphasis, is almost totally ignored and is seldom – if ever- preached from our pulpits! WHY is this”
For Our Lord and His contemporaries the Old Testament and the Prophets WERE ‘The Scriptures’ and WERE the inspired, authentic and unquestioned word of Almighty God. The Bible is God’s own exposition of HIS PLAN to redeem sinful man and to establish His Kingdom on Earth by using His specially created instrument – His people Israel. It is one complete entity – the Old Testament leading up to the New. Neither is comprehensible without the other, the one provides the KEY to the other. Thus it is NO Co-incidence whatever that the Devil has been striving to impede God’s people in using their vital key. No wonder he is conspiring to remove – by stealth – from the ken of the present day descendants of God’s Israel such clues as they have to their true identity and destiny as God’s Servant Nation!
Language and Names
How did we – the British – get our name? What is the origin of our name and what does it mean” Our country is called Britain – is it not a strange co-incidence that in the ancient Hebrew (the language of the Old Testament) BRITH means ‘covenant’ and 1SH mean ‘man’, so BRIT-ISH means ‘Covenant man’. AIN means ‘land’ so BRITH or BRIT-AIN means ‘Land of the Covenant’…Just another co-incidence of course!
There is a significant basic similarity between the old indigenous tongues of these Isles and ancient Hebrew (not Yiddish which is totally different) e.g. between Welsh and Hebrew, between Gaelic and Hebrew and between Erse and Hebrew. Cornish is similar as also is Breton. How did these old Celtic tongues of these Islands evolve? And why is there this basic similarity to Hebrew?
As mentioned above, Yiddish — the Jews language — is dissimilar to Hebrew being a manufactured language of Eastern Europe with little or no Hebraic origin.
Is it a co-incidence that in some ancient Welsh documents (written in Welsh) the writers describe themselves as ‘BRYTH-Y-BRYTHAM’ meaning ‘Covenanters in the land of the Covenant’! Where did they get that from?
The migrating Northern Kingdom of Israel — Ephraim (The Ten Tribes) were known in various lands through which they passed by various names: e.g. Saac-ae or Sac-ae (of Isaac from which derives Saac- sons or SAXONS – sons of Isaac). They were also known as Beth-sac.
The BEHISTUN Rock in Persia has an inscription ordered by Darius the Great in three languages, describing (among other things) the captivity of the Israelites. The names by which they were referred to were KUMRI. GHIMRI and SAKAE. Compare KUMRI with the Welsh CWYMRU – pronounced ‘coomri’. Pliny, Ptolemy and other contemporary writers describe a people called SAKAE, BRETTI or MASSAGETAE as migrating westward. They are also referred to as the BETH-OMRI or BIT-UMRI, thought to mean ‘the house of Omri’ who was King of the northern House of Israel when tribute was first paid to Assyria.
(to be continued)
