" ... take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Joshua ... the high priest; And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD: Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both." ~ Zechariah 6:11-13

While there is a dualistic element of this Messianic prophecy of using the contemporary Joshua the high priest in similitude of Jesus Christ, it must be considered that the purposeful dualism was but placed upon it in order that the deeper more significant application and meaning of it might remain hid from the Jews who would be tempted and likely of the mind to have altared or removed the whole of it, being that it spoke of and applied to JESUS by name.

Now in the previous topic section, we have already discussed Jesus as the promised 'BRANCH' of Joseph whose posterity was spoken of in terms of various branches extending off of the bough of Joseph. And while this current topic will proceed along that line of thought, it will further consider from the perspective of Jesus The BRANCH, the many additional implications and applications beyond that singular perspective of it so mentioned in that topic of the Branches of Joseph.

As we begin to study more indepth 'The BRANCH', we ought to first note that this IS NOT the first time of which Zechariah speaks of Jesus or Jehoshua in terms of being The BRANCH. That first mention comes in Chapter 3. And before we go there, it ought to be mentioned that while the Jews and many of the scholars consider that Zechariah's visions and prophecies had direct application to the contemporary circumstance of the Jews of his day and the building of that temple, in reality the whole of the visions and prophecies have a much broader all-inclusive panaramic application and meaning of them. And it is only in that they were 'hid' from the consideration of the Jews by their immediate dualistic application to them, but that the more universal application of them was much more their central purpose and mean.

Be it here stated that the whole of Zechariah's visions and prophecies had more to do with God's Eternal Plan, from the beginning and unto the end than they did with just the immediate application of them to the contemporay Jews of 520-518 B.C. from the 2^nd to the 4^th years of the reign of Darius. If one will place them in that more eternal perspective from before the world was and God's plan for it from the selection of Jehovah to be the Redeeming Son of God to the final judgment of it by Jehovah who is Jesus Christ, then the visions and prophecies of Zechariah would be greatly more understood and appreciated according to the deeper and greater meaningful meanings and applications.

For example Zechariah chapter 3 is not just a fanciful vision of the contempory priest Joshua and his conflicts with Satan. What it is when placed in the more universal perspective is a vision of that past judgment council held before God the Eternal Father wherein determination was concluded between Jehovah who is Jehoshua (the more formal and proper form of the name used by Zechariah in the Hebrew text) and Lucifer who is branded and given the name of 'Satan' (See author's commentary and further interpretion Zechariah 3).

Now the previous topic of The BRANCH being one of those of Joseph of Egypt is but the 'short' of the story. But we will neither get into the 'long' of the story, for that would intell an in depth analysis of Zechariah and everything in the Old Testament concerning 'The BRANCH'. Therefore we will but attempt to make the 'long story short' by drawing out but the more significant particulars, but in so doing what is significant to one is not always to another, thus consider that some might like to have included much more of somewhat less.

In Zechariah chapter three Zechariah beholds a vision of Jehovah and Lucifer being brought to stand before God. God passes judgment against Lucifer rebuking him and naming him SATAN. He chooses and proclaims those followers of Jehovah as a peculiar people to be wondered at and as being of the 'Holy City', that which is named upon for the followers of PEACE, those of Jesus, 'JERUSALEM'. He establishes that though the plan places the 'filthy garments' of sin upon Jehoshua, Jesus who is Jehovah, that they will be taken away from him according to the Plan of Salvation, and through the Atonement he will be robed in the glorious Robes of the Kingdom of God and crowned with that eternal crown of the glory of God, he being make High Priest and King. And this was to be according to Jesus' faithful performance in the world during his purposeful ministry as The Father's Servant 'The BRANCH'. Yes, God the Father told Jehovah and his followers he hear his word, that he would bring forth His Servant, 'The BRANCH'. And through the administration of seven dispensations of time, whose seven eyes upon the earth, the stone', were set; he would bring redemption and forgiveness, removing as it were the iniquity of the earth in one day, the Day of the Lord which would be that great Millennial Day of Jehoshua's, Jehovah's, reign as King David, the beloved over all the earth. This is wherein Zechariah first names 'The BRANCH', that being the name upon Jesus Christ and the prophecies concerning him. And such are the things hidden in the writing of Zechariah.

"Hear now O Joshua [Jehoshua ~ JESUS] the high priest ['The High Priest'], thou and thy fellows that sit before thee: for they are men wondered at: for , behold, I will bring forth my servant the BRANCH. ~ Zechariah 3:8

In stating to Jehovah and his follower that he would bring forth the BRANCH, God the Father is stating that he will apply the plan for which Jehovah was so chosen to perform over that proposed by Lucifer. Though it is and was a given that this would be, this in the formal and official proclamation of God the Father of accepting the plan He and Jehovah had set forth over and above that design and plan proposed by Lucifer. This declaration was no casual matter in heaven with such a division of ideas and the various spirit children of the Father having taken sides and being so divided. Thus it was a formal and offical affair, a Judgment Council', in which the matter was settled and offically pronouced. And it was this which Zechariah had shown unto him in vision, which is lost to the understanding of men except by the spirit revealing it unto them.

Now with the significance of the 'BRANCH' so established as being JESUS CHRIST, we may proceed on to further delving into the matter of the further meanings and implications of the performance of the mission of the BRANCH and his affiliation with the two House of Israel, the House of Leah and the House of Rachel, the House of Judah, Leah's representative son, and the House of Joseph and/or Ephraim, Rachel's representative son. For indeed, the Messiah did have such a dual relationship to both of the two houses of Jacob, to the one as Messiah ben David, and to the other as Messiah ben Joseph, though in fact even Messiah ben David was of Joseph also, as well as being of Judah.

Now in considering the BRANCH and its true source, we ought to construct a family tree. It would be the family tree of Jacob or the whole of the number of the tribes of Israel. That House of Jacob was divided between Ephraim representing Joseph as well as Jacob, he being the firstborn of Jacob by adoption; and Judah. Ezekiel speaks of this in terms of 'Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions' and 'Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions'. (Ezekiel 37:16). It seems quite significant that while there was a mixture of the various tribes of Israel which did continue to associate with Jerusalem during the scattering, that for the most part 'all of the house of Israel', the majority 10 tribes, were associtated with Ephraim, the house of Joseph.

Now we know that by 'blood' line heritage, that Jesus was of the tribe of Judah, having been born of Ruth by the redeeming kinsman Boaz. And Boaz was of the lineage of the House of Judah. That is a given. Jesus had the blood of the Jews in his veins inherited from his mother Mary, who like her husband and cousin Joseph was of the House of David. And it was that blood which was 'shed' in Gethsemane and upon the cross. On the other hand, we know that Joseph and then his son Ephraim were the bears of the covenant of the fathers. The 'Birthright' was upon Ephraim, and it was Ephraim and his companions who were called by the covenant name 'Israel', being known as the Kingdom of Israel,

Now we know that in the dividing and the scattering of the whole of the house of Israel, that the Kingdom of Isreal was first scattered and lost. Even some of those who remained in Jerusalem, who were not of the Jews, were eventually scattered, as was that remnant of the house of Joseph of which the Book of Mormon people were, so scattered from Jerusalem though being the seed of Joseph. Thus one may ask, how is it that within the remaining Kingdom of the Jews, the Kingdom and house of Judah, could a Messiah of Joseph remain? And this is a part of the hidding of the Messiah in Judah, even to the point that he was of the blood line of the Jews and considered by them as being a Jew. All that which is taught concerning Jesus being a Jew is correct in this respect. Even Jesus himself, taught the Samaritan woman at the well that 'salvation was of the Jews' (John 4:22) in this respect and consideration.

In the next topic section we will attend to the matter of priesthood authority and right in respect to Jesus needing to fulfill all righteousness and obtain his priesthood right to the covenant in and through that covenant heritage. And off course that 'covenant heritage' was in Joseph and Ephraim, the lineage of the 'Birthright'. Thus Jesus needed to be that rightful heir of Ephraim and of the house of Joseph to rightly obtain that heirship of the covenant. That is discussed in the next section in more detail. We mention it here only as it relates to our analysis of 'The BRANCH'.

Now the propigation of a 'branch' can proceed in various manners. In the Book of Mormon there is a grand analogy and allegaory of the Olive Tree, and how branches may be cut from one and grafted into another. Christ's 'grafting' in this respect worked to be an 'opposite' grafting. By the vicarious performance of Boaz, Obed was the son of Naomi and the legal and rightful heir to all that property which Boaz had purchased of the houses of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion. Boaz did not buy them for himself, but because Naomi's house had sold them, in order to act as the 'redeeming kinsman', restoring the House of Elimelch upon the firstborn son of Ruth, Boaz needed to purchase all that property by right of inheritance was that of the House of Elimelch. Thus Obed not only inherited the properties of the house of Elimelch by this great act of Boaz, but he also obtained that special priesthood right and blessing of the Covenant which was a part of the heritage of Elimelch, being that Ephrathite by whom the blessings of the covenant had come dowm from Ephraim.

Now in this is how a 'Jew' by bloodline, born of Boaz, was the legal heir and BRANCH of the House of Joseph. Jesus who was hung from the 'Tree' or 'Bough' of Judah, was an actual 'graft' into the house of Joseph and heir to that covenant which came down through Ephraim. Yet this is also how it was enabled the Jesus, of the the covenant lineage of Ephraim, could be hid in Judah. King David chose Judah over Israel or Ephraim, and by that blood lineage relationship, the Jews claimed him as their kinsman. And this though that Israel in Ephraim had the greater claim in David. He being that son and heir by the Law of God.

When considering Jesus as 'The BRANCH', certainly one must consider him the 'most righteous branch'. In this respect there is an interesting qualification which the prophetic blessings of Joseph, given him directly by the Lord, contains. When one understands that the Messiah would be considered 'The Righteous BRANCH', then there is a clear and distinct reason and cause that both in the JST Genesis and in the Book of Mormon a particular and revealing disclaimer had to be made.

" ... I [Joseph] have obtained a promise of the Lord, that out of the fruit of my loins, the Lord God will raise up a righteous branch out of my loins; and unto thee, whom my father Jacob hath name Israel, a prophet; (not the Messiah who is called Shilo;) and this prophet shall deliver my people out of Egypt in the days of thy bondage." ~ JST Genesis 50:24

Elsewhere in this text is discussed just how it is that Moses was considered to be of the seed of Joseph (JST Genesis 50:29), being the recognized son of Pharaoh's daughter, which implies that at that time, Joseph's posterity had risen to be the king of Egypt. But that is not the concern here. The concern is in respect to this 'righteous branch' which in addition to Moses, the Lord would raise up of Joseph's rightful and legal seed. One point of interest here is that, "If neither Moses, who is stated to be considered of the house of Joseph, nor the 'righteous branch' being spoken of can be considered anything but being of the house of Joseph, why then is the 'disclaimer' necessary?" If it was so widely considered that Judah, because of his blessing from Jacob (Genesis 49:10) was to be the ancestor of the Messiah, why was it needful for Joseph to make the disclaimer that neither this Moses, which was to be known to be of his house, nor this 'righteous brach' being spoken of, should be the Messiah. Only if the Messiah was known to come of the house of Joseph, only if that 'righteous branch' of the many branches of Joseph was to be the Messiah's ancestry, even Messiah ben Joseph, is there any need for any such disclaimer to be made. That is if a prophet was raised out of Benjamin, Simon, Reuben, Dan or any of the other sons of Israel, there would be no need of such a disclaim. Only if that 'most righteous BRANCH' of the Messiah was to come out of Joseph is there a need for such a disclaimer.

" ... Joseph truly saw our day. And he obtained a promise of the Lord, that out of the fruit of his lions the Lord God would raise up a righteous branch unto the house of Israel; not the Messiah, but a branch which was to be broken off ... " ~ 2 Nephi 3:5

One might say in reading the JST Genesis account of Joseph prophecies that the disclaimer of the Messiah was only to be applied directly to Moses and not the 'righteous branch of Joseph'. This, if true would eliminate the 'righteous branch of Joseph' from being considered from whence the Messiah might come and put an end to all this matter of analyzing 'The BRANCH'. But as the prophet Lehi did so indicate, he in his own paraphrasing and explaining the prophecies of Joseph to his family, he had to make the same disclaimer, so that they would understand that the Messiah would not come of them. As Jacob of the Book of Mormon points out, Lehi's and Ishmael's descendants of the Book of Mormon were considered to be a 'righteous branch 'from the fruit of the lions of Joseph' (Jacob 2:25). And thus Lehi's whole purpose would have been to given his children the understanding that, while the Messiah was to come of Joseph and be 'a most righteous branch', the Messiah would not come of their particualr 'righteous branch' of Joseph. And more in particular, Lehi seems to understand that the particular 'branch of Joseph' form which the Messiah would come, would not be one 'which was to be broken off', but was to remain in Jerusalem. In short, Lehi knew that Jesus was to be a 'righteous branch of the house of Joseph' and he also knew that Jesus would be born in the land of Jerusalem and not be broken off. Thus was Lehi's disclaim and though similar to that of Joseph in JST Genesis 50:24, Lehi's was more particular, and of a more direct disclaimer that Jesus, who was to be of Joseph, was not to be of their particular cut off group.

Another particular concerning a 'BRANCH' is that consideration by which source is the branch nurished? In the analogy of a branch, a branch is dependant upon the tree for its sustenance. That source of strength is drawn upon from the roots and out through that main bough from which the branch extends from. In this system, one branch which is way out on a limb away from anothe branch of another bough, can not receive its sustance directly from that other branch or that other branch's bough. It is dependant upon his own particular bough and related branching system which extends there from. And herein one states, will there you have it, Jesus was a Jew and cannot get his 'right from Ephraim' to the covenant blessings of the priesthood and the related blessings of the covenant of the fathers. But in that quick judgment they have disgard one great detail. While it was Boaz' vicareous performance which did produce Obed, the offspring of Ruth, that offspring Obed, was legally and rightfully the seed of Mahlon. And he was 'grafted' into the house of Naomi and was recognized a Naomi's rightful and legal son, the heir of the house of Elimelech, Mahlon and Chilion by the Law of God. And just calling a horse a cow does not make it so. Just because King David preferred Judah over Israel did not make the lineage of Obed any less of the house of Elimelech and Mahlon. Jesse was that Ephrathite, David was an Ephrathite, Jesus was an Ephrathite by the Law of God it was so. The preference of a man can not change that. Obed was by the Law of God as set forth by the Law of Moses, the seed of the dead. thus was his posterity to forever be in Israel. All sources of rights and blessings of heirship, either to the priesthood of God by way of the covenant of the Fathers or by any other such blessing of that covenant of the fathers, that strength and nurishment most need come through that bough in which the covenant resides. And it resides in Joseph and Ephraim and from thence to Obed and Jesse even down to Jesus Christ, the son of Mary, who was of the House of David, and even Joseph the carpenter who was the legal adoptive father of Jesus, and of the house of David also.

And now, the workings of a 'BRANCH' is varied and particular. In other writing references to Jesus within the concept of 'The BRANCH', he is spoken of as the 'Rod', 'Staff', 'Sprout', even the 'Tender Plant'. It is of interest to note that a 'rod' and a 'staff' what but the same thing in the respect that is was but a 'stick' or 'branch' which had been cut off from its tree and used as a pole to facilitate man in his use of it. Moses' staff which the Lord gave him was called a 'rod'. It was Aaron's 'rod' or 'staff' which did bud forth spontaneously. Now some trees and plants have that capability. You take a 'stick' from the tree, plant it in the ground, and it is capable of growing you a new tree. The 'Life is in itself', similiar to Jesus. Such is the North Caroline popular tree. I planted such a cut off stick from another tree some forty years ago and now I have a great and grand tree of my own from which others have taken sticks and grown their own trees as well.

Jesus is such a 'Rod', a rod like unto Aaron's which did sprout forth spontaneously. The life of such, like unto Jesus, is within itself. This 'Rod of Christ' of whom Christ is stated to be in Isaiah chapter 11, is said in D&C 113:4, to be 'partly a descendant of Jesse as well as of Ephraim, or of the house of Joseph'. This 'partly is a needed clarification, for indeed Jesus was the Son of God, and only 'partly' of the lineage of Jesse back through Ephraim even of the house of Joseph. That 'other' half of Jesus' lineage which is of Mary is a straight line from 'shoot' to 'brach' to 'bough'. And that is the source of Jesus' earthly right to the blessings of the fathers. It comes from Jesse who is as well as from Ephraim who is as well as of the house of Joseph. And in this, Jesus was not of the house of Judah but by the vicarious performance of Boaz, which ought not be considered. It is because of the usurption of the Jews to claim it, though they have also rejected it, in their murder of Jesus Christ, who was the Messiah, their God.

Now again, when a rod is cut from the parent plant, it is called a 'cutting'. And it may be replanted and grow. When such cutting begins to grow, it is a 'tender plant', even like unto a seed. Much care must be taken to nourish such a young and tender plant unto maturity. Such was the life of Jesus, he was born innocent, the veil having been drawn upon his mide.

Just as a bough of a tree provides life to it branches, so does the Lord provide such for those who are of his care. In Isaiah 4:2 it states that the branch of the Lord is beautiful and glorious. We are to follow that order of the Lord. We are to become like him, as his children in the gospel, we are his fruit. This is the reward in the Lord and the course of men who do follow after him. And it that day shall the fruit of the earth be excellent and comely, for they will be the fruit of Jesus Christ, his sons and his daughters in the gospel.

Jesus Christ is the servant of all. He taught this principle to his apostles. In being God the Father's servant unto all men, it is by and through Jesus Christ that al the various kingdoms, or places of dwelling hereafter is made possible unto men by, through and according to that great vicarious ordinance of sacrifice, Jesus Christ form the sins of the world unto the resurrecion and salvation of all men.