Salvation

Status
Not open for further replies.

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
There is no scripture for that. You may have a tradition somewhere, or a monk's addition that is not authentic, but there is no scripture to confirm your assertion.

There is in holy scripture a statement that John's father is Zechariah.
Luke 1:57-66 57 Now the time came for Elizabeth to give birth, and she bore a son. 58 And her neighbours and relatives heard that the Lord had shown great mercy to her, and they rejoiced with her. 59 And on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child. And they would have called him Zechariah after his father, 60 but his mother answered, No; he shall be called John. 61 And they said to her, None of your relatives is called by this name. 62 And they made signs to his father, inquiring what he wanted him to be called. 63 And he asked for a writing tablet and wrote, His name is John. And they all wondered. 64 And immediately his mouth was opened and his tongue loosed, and he spoke, blessing God. 65 And fear came on all their neighbours. And all these things were talked about through all the hill country of Judea, 66 and all who heard them laid them up in their hearts, saying, What then will this child be? For the hand of the Lord was with him.​
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
You are wrong. I will leave it at that.

I have a feeling that you desperately want me to be wrong...

But in order to prove your desire, my brother...

You must identify this Zachariah as not being Elizabeth's husband...

And this you cannot do...

All you can truthfully say is: "I don't know..."

Arsenios
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
There is in holy scripture a statement that John's father is Zechariah.
Luke 1:57-66 57 Now the time came for Elizabeth to give birth, and she bore a son. 58 And her neighbours and relatives heard that the Lord had shown great mercy to her, and they rejoiced with her. 59 And on the eighth day they came to circumcise the child. And they would have called him Zechariah after his father, 60 but his mother answered, No; he shall be called John. 61 And they said to her, None of your relatives is called by this name. 62 And they made signs to his father, inquiring what he wanted him to be called. 63 And he asked for a writing tablet and wrote, His name is John. And they all wondered. 64 And immediately his mouth was opened and his tongue loosed, and he spoke, blessing God. 65 And fear came on all their neighbours. And all these things were talked about through all the hill country of Judea, 66 and all who heard them laid them up in their hearts, saying, What then will this child be? For the hand of the Lord was with him.​
There are many Zechariah's in Israel and a prophet named Zechariah who is part of the Canon of scripture. You and Arsenios are making a blind connection that scripture doesn't support.
That being said, we're discussing salvation and I have stated that John the Baptist message was not the good news of God's grace, but was a call to the Nation of Israel to repent for Messiah was here. That was different than Jesus message after his resurrection when Jesus ushers in the New Covenant.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
I have a feeling that you desperately want me to be wrong...

But in order to prove your desire, my brother...

You must identify this Zachariah as not being Elizabeth's husband...

And this you cannot do...

All you can truthfully say is: "I don't know..."

Arsenios
I have no responsibility. There were many Zechariah's in Israel and there is a Zechariah who was a prophet in Israel before John's dad. You are making a blind connection and calling it fact.
Zechariah 1
[1]In November of the second year of King Darius’s reign, the lord gave this message to the prophet Zechariah son of Berekiah and grandson of Iddo:
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
There are many Zechariah's in Israel and a prophet named Zechariah who is part of the Canon of scripture. You and Arsenios are making a blind connection that scripture doesn't support.
That being said, we're discussing salvation and I have stated that John the Baptist message was not the good news of God's grace, but was a call to the Nation of Israel to repent for Messiah was here. That was different than Jesus message after his resurrection when Jesus ushers in the New Covenant.

The prophet Zechariah was the son of Berechiah, son of Iddo (Zechariah 1:1) and he was not murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
The prophet Zechariah was the son of Berechiah, son of Iddo (Zechariah 1:1) and he was not murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.
Neither was John the Baptist dad.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
I have no responsibility.

Your confession has been noted... :)

But fear not, my Brother!

I DO have responsibility! :)

There were many Zechariah's in Israel and there is a Zechariah who was a prophet in Israel before John's dad. You are making a blind connection and calling it fact.

The prolem with your theory is that Christ named the time of the Zachariah whose blood cried out from the stones of the Way between the Temple and the Altar... This was not just SOME random old Testament Zechariah of bye-gone ages past, but the very singular and last blood spilled by the Pharisees and their co-conspirators... A contemporaty holy man, even Zachariah, the Most High Priest of the Temple of God... Read it aqgain:

Matt 23:35
That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth,
from the blood of righteous Abel
unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias,
whom ye slew between the Temple and the Altar.


You see, this Zacharias, who is the husband of Elizabeth, and the father of the Baptizer of our Lord, SERVED both at the Altar and in the Temple, and the Jews hid his death at their hands, but Christ proclaimed that blood to them in their condemnation...

OF COURSE it is not recorded in the Bible, for it was concealed from all...
Their only problem was that Christ bore His Witness...
What MORE do you NEED?

He is the ONLY Zachariah it COULD have been, because he is the ONLY High Priest of that Temple and Altar...

Zechariah 1
[1]In November of the second year of King Darius’s reign, the lord gave this message to the prophet Zechariah son of Berekiah and grandson of Iddo:

Can you show this other Zechariah to have been slain between the Altar and the Temple?

Did he SERVE there, where only one person CAN?

Was he a priest or a prophet or both?

And be the LAST one murdered by the Jews?


Arsenios
 
Last edited:

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Your response has nothing to do with salvation and it certainly does nothing to make John the Baptist's message a message of grace.
You still cannot differentiate between the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant.
Your confession has been noted... :)

But fear not, my Brother!

I DO have responsibility! :)



The prolem with your theory is that Christ named the time of the Zachariah whose blood cried out from the stones of the Way between the Temple and the Altar... This was not just SOME random old Testament Zechariah of bye-gone ages past, but the very singular and last blood spilled by the Pharisees and their co-conspirators... A contemporaty holy man, even Zachariah, the Most High Priest of the Temple of God... Read it aqgain:

Matt 23:35
That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth,
from the blood of righteous Abel
unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias,
whom ye slew between the Temple and the Altar.


You see, this Zacharias, who is the husband of Elizabeth, and the father of the Baptizer of our Lord, SERVED both at the Altar and in the Temple, and the Jews hid his death at their hands, but Christ proclaimed that blood to them in their condemnation...

OF COURSE it is not recorded in the Bible, for it was concealed from all...
Their only problem was that Christ bore His Witness...
What MORE do you NEED?

He is the ONLY Zachariah it COULD have been, because he is the ONLY High Priest of that Temple and Altar...



Can you show this other Zechariah to have been slain between the Altar and the Temple?

Did he SERVE there, where only one person CAN?

Was he a priest or a prophet or both?

And be the LAST one murdered by the Jews?


Arsenios
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
That is where he SERVED God, my Brother...

He was THE High Priest of the Temple and the Altar...

Arsenios
You are still just speculating. There are many other Zechariah's who were priests.
Jesus would likely have told everyone he was talking about John's dad, but he did not do so.
Just admit, you are speculating.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
You are still just speculating. There are many other Zechariah's who were priests.
Jesus would likely have told everyone he was talking about John's dad, but he did not do so.
Just admit, you are speculating.

Actually, this understanding is affirmed in the Church from the beginnings...
And it is not contradicted by the Bible which the Church wrote...

It is YOU who are speculating that it is NOT the father of John the Baptist...

It does, I must admit, help one be an ANTI-Latin Christian...


Arsenios
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Actually, this understanding is affirmed in the Church from the beginnings...
And it is not contradicted by the Bible which the Church wrote...

It is YOU who are speculating that it is NOT the father of John the Baptist...

It does, I must admit, help one be an ANTI-Latin Christian...


Arsenios
Arsenio, your church has the potential to be wrong and your church never wrote any inspired scripture.
God's chosen and adopted persons, however, did write as God guided them.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
There are many other Zechariah's who were priests.

Name ONE other and prove it by the Bible...

Jesus would likely have told everyone he was talking about John's dad,

Sheer speculation on YOUR part...

but he did not do so.

He did not NEED to do so...
BECAUSE...
He was talking to his murderers...

They ALREADY KNEW, you see...

I mean, really, Menno - How could they NOT know??

Hhhhmmmmm???

Just admit, you are speculating.

I will now speculate that it would do you a lot of good to admit that YOU are the one SPECULATING...

When I first read that passage, I did not know that the man Jesus was referring to as the victim of the murdering by the Jews was John the Baptist's father, and did not speculate that it was or was not anyone... I just did not know who that was at all... You are in the same boat, are you not?


Arsenios
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I am beginning to lose track of why we're interested in the murder of saint John the Baptist's father; I feel sure it is connected to salvation but can you remind me of how it is connected?
 
Last edited:

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Name ONE other and prove it by the Bible...



Sheer speculation on YOUR part...



He did not NEED to do so...
BECAUSE...
He was talking to his murderers...

They ALREADY KNEW, you see...

I mean, really, Menno - How could they NOT know??

Hhhhmmmmm???



I will now speculate that it would do you a lot of good to admit that YOU are the one SPECULATING...

When I first read that passage, I did not know that the man Jesus was referring to as the victim of the murdering by the Jews was John the Baptist's father, and did not speculate that it was or was not anyone... I just did not know who that was at all... You are in the same boat, are you not?


Arsenios
Here's what John Gill wrote:

Others have been of opinion, that Zechariah the prophet is designed; and indeed, he is said to be the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo, Zec 1:1 and the Jewish Targumist speaks of a Zechariah, the son of Iddo, as slain by the Jews in the temple. His words are these {a};

“as ye slew Zechariah, the son of Iddo, the high priest, and faithful prophet, in the house of the sanctuary of the Lord, on the day of atonement; because he reproved you, that ye might not do that evil which is before the Lord.”

And him the Jews make to be the same with Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah, in Isa 8:2 and read Berechiah {b}: but the Targumist seems to confound Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, with him; for the prophet Zechariah was not an high priest, Joshua was high priest in his time; nor does it appear from any writings, that he was killed by the Jews; nor is it probable that they would be guilty of such a crime, just upon their return from captivity; and besides, he could not be slain in such a place, because the temple, and altar, were not yet built: it remains, that it must be Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, who was slain in the court of the house of the Lord, 2Ch 24:20 who, as Abel was the first, he is the last of the righteous men whose death is related in the Scriptures, and for whose blood vengeance was required, as for Abel’s. He was slain in the court of the house of the Lord; and so the Ethiopic version here renders it, in the midst of the holy house.
. . .
The chief objections to its being this Zechariah are, that the names do agree; the one being the son of Jehoiada, the other the son of Barachias; and the killing of him was eight hundred years before this time; when it might have been thought our Lord would have instanced in a later action: and this he speaks of, he ascribes to the men of that generation: to which may be replied, that as to the difference of names, the father of this Zechariah might have two names, which is no unusual thing; besides, these two names signify much the same thing; Jehoiada signifies praise the Lord, and Barachias bless the Lord; just as Eliakim and Jehoiakim, are names of the same person, and signify the same thing, 2Ch 36:4. Moreover, Jerom tells us, that in the Hebrew copy of this Gospel used by the Nazarenes, he found the name Jehoiada instead of Barachias: and as to the action being done so long ago, what has been suggested already may be an answer to it, that it was the last on record in the writings of the Old Testament; and that his blood, as Abel’s, is said to require vengeance: and Christ might the rather pitch upon this action, because it was committed on a very great and worthy man, and in the holy place, and by the body of the people, at the command of their king, and with their full approbation, and consent: and therefore, though this was not done by the individual persons in being in Christ’s time, yet by the same people; and so they are said to slay him, and his blood is required of them: and their horrible destruction was a punishment for that load of national guilt, which had been for many hundreds of years contracting, and heaping upon them.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Arsenios, your church has the potential to be wrong and your church never wrote any inspired scripture.

The New Testament was written by members of the Church, the Body of Christ, Who is Her Head...

It is not even up for debate...

God's chosen and adopted persons, however, did write as God guided them.

Exacty right, and they were members of the Church which incuded their writings in the Canon of Scripture in the 4th Century after using them from the beginnings as they were being written...

We are the Church that GAVE you the Scriptures, my Brother...

It was our JOY to do so...

The New Testament was written by Holy Ones of God who were members of the Body of Christ, the Ekklesia of God...


Arsenios
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,198
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Here's what John Gill wrote...

John Gill was - I do not doubt - well read and very strongly supportive of the "doctrines of grace" nevertheless the targums were written long after the Lord's earthly mission was completed and what they say is no more than Jewish opinion centuries after Christ.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Here's what John Gill wrote:

Others have been of opinion, that Zechariah the prophet is designed; and indeed, he is said to be the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo, Zec 1:1 and the Jewish Targumist speaks of a Zechariah, the son of Iddo, as slain by the Jews in the temple. His words are these {a};

“as ye slew Zechariah, the son of Iddo, the high priest, and faithful prophet, in the house of the sanctuary of the Lord, on the day of atonement; because he reproved you, that ye might not do that evil which is before the Lord.”

And him the Jews make to be the same with Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah, in Isa 8:2 and read Berechiah {b}: but the Targumist seems to confound Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, with him; for the prophet Zechariah was not an high priest, Joshua was high priest in his time; nor does it appear from any writings, that he was killed by the Jews; nor is it probable that they would be guilty of such a crime, just upon their return from captivity; and besides, he could not be slain in such a place, because the temple, and altar, were not yet built: it remains, that it must be Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, who was slain in the court of the house of the Lord, 2Ch 24:20 who, as Abel was the first, he is the last of the righteous men whose death is related in the Scriptures, and for whose blood vengeance was required, as for Abel’s. He was slain in the court of the house of the Lord; and so the Ethiopic version here renders it, in the midst of the holy house.
. . .
The chief objections to its being this Zechariah are, that the names do agree; the one being the son of Jehoiada, the other the son of Barachias; and the killing of him was eight hundred years before this time; when it might have been thought our Lord would have instanced in a later action: and this he speaks of, he ascribes to the men of that generation: to which may be replied, that as to the difference of names, the father of this Zechariah might have two names, which is no unusual thing; besides, these two names signify much the same thing; Jehoiada signifies praise the Lord, and Barachias bless the Lord; just as Eliakim and Jehoiakim, are names of the same person, and signify the same thing, 2Ch 36:4. Moreover, Jerom tells us, that in the Hebrew copy of this Gospel used by the Nazarenes, he found the name Jehoiada instead of Barachias: and as to the action being done so long ago, what has been suggested already may be an answer to it, that it was the last on record in the writings of the Old Testament; and that his blood, as Abel’s, is said to require vengeance: and Christ might the rather pitch upon this action, because it was committed on a very great and worthy man, and in the holy place, and by the body of the people, at the command of their king, and with their full approbation, and consent: and therefore, though this was not done by the individual persons in being in Christ’s time, yet by the same people; and so they are said to slay him, and his blood is required of them: and their horrible destruction was a punishment for that load of national guilt, which had been for many hundreds of years contracting, and heaping upon them.

We, this is the big "I don't know" I was teling you about... John Gill does not encompass the time frame that Jesus bracketed by the two events, with the second being contemporary with those with whom He was speaking...

The keyword is "ALL the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias..." So we know that the first murder of a righteous man was by his brother Cain, murdering Abel, yes? And from this first time until the present time, when Zachariah was murdered in the most holy place very recently, ALL the blood of the Righteous slain is UPON these Jews present... It is a dreadful indictment, you see... I cannot be any other Zacharias because there is NO OTHER current Zacharias that COULD have been slain there... He was the ONLY Zachariah who SERVED there, and only those serving there were permitted to BE there... It was just that kind of place...

This is a great "side bar" for a Savation thread...

Arsenios
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
The New Testament was written by members of the Church, the Body of Christ, Who is Her Head...

It is not even up for debate...



Exacty right, and they were members of the Church which incuded their writings in the Canon of Scripture in the 4th Century after using them from the beginnings as they were being written...

We are the Church that GAVE you the Scriptures, my Brother...

It was our JOY to do so...

The New Testament was written by Holy Ones of God who were members of the Body of Christ, the Ekklesia of God...


Arsenios
They were Baptists! That's the first church, Arsenio. Even your beloved John was a....Baptist.
 

Arsenios

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2018
Messages
3,577
Location
Pacific North West
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
They were Baptists! That's the first church, Arsenios. Even your beloved John was a....Baptist.

God Bless ALL the Baptists!
Now and Ever...
And unto the Ages of Ages!
Amen

Did your "s" key stop working when you type Arsenio rather than Arsenios?
Had to do my second correction of your post...
Might even be against the rules for me to do so...
You don't want me to break the rules, do ya?

Arsenios
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom