that's what you say.
first of all, it's the LORD Jesus, the Spirit, the Holy Spirit who is speaking to the prophets of OLD. as here, Zechariah1:1 "In the eighth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the LORD unto Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo the prophet...
That is not the point. The point was your misrepresentation of Scripture in your post #(235). I know who Zachariah the King was and who Zechariah the prophet was. As you do now also. Yet you throw in your misinformation in order to create some sort of confusion in the Scriptures.
I have...
There were a couple of prominent men in the Bible named Zechariah (alternate spelling Zacharias or Zachariah). One was an Old Testament prophet who prophesied in the days of Haggai and who wrote the book of Zechariah (Ezra 5:1; Zechariah1:1).
I believe it's more to do, with a focus, a religious perspective, that they have mistakenly adhered to, which is why 'christian' and 'rabbinical' studies often seem the same. Rabbinical studies are in a certain perspective, and christians may not understand that. The academics are totally lost...
Isaiah defines it self similar to a computer code system, so for example if we look up every word 'Maher Shalal Hash Baz' across Isaiah, it is defined by additional entries in classes, it isn't written in a standard writing style.
So people like scholars, Rabbinic Jews, clerically minded...
Isaiah had vision explaining Yeshua by name 700 years before it happened (Isaiah 52:10, etc), and Zechariah son of Berechiah 500 years (Isaiah 8:1, Zechariah1:1)...
Thus the idea Isaiah needed to see these countries to know they were there seems limited.
In my opinion. :innocent:
Would you agree Zerubbabel was the 'first governor of the repatriated Jews' at Haggai 2:21.
Zerubbabel I find was a descendant of King David at 1 Chronicles 3:19-20, ancestor of Jesus at Matthew 1:12-13; Luke 3:27, and father of seven (7) sons. Zerubbabel was the actual son of Pedaiah but...
If we examine the Gospels in Greek, they are all very different from each other, and the Q source idea is silly, as there would be evidence of it...
It is like the skeptics guide to understanding the Gospels; whereas when we examine them closely, it really doesn't add up.
The Gospel of John is...