The Essene Quarter

[daq]

There are several articles I just read over the last few days, by an archaeologist named Bargil Pixner which I thought I would post here. The first article is mainly archaeology, the discovery of the southwestern wall which enclosed that corner and gate of the Essene Quarter of Yerushalem. The findings are laid out fairly straightforwardly and are undisputed, and most everyone now understands this area to have been the location of the Essene Quarter. What I think less people realize is that the Upper Room was located in this same area, and below that was a very ancient Jewish-Christian Synagogue. That is where the second article comes in, written by the same author and archaeologist, and that article is much more from a standpoint of historical records with a background knowledge of the archaeology of the area. I found nothing in either of these articles that sounds outlandish or like wishful thinking, (and I am generally pretty skeptical about such claims as those made herein). The second article appears to be laid out quite well, at least to me anyway, being methodical, well researched, and well thought out, as well as reasonable and full of common sense. The following map is not from either of the articles but I include it just to show the location of the Essene Quarter and the very ancient traditional location of the Upper Room which he speaks about in the second article.

Both of these articles first appeared in Biblical Archaeological Review, but this is apparently a website for a Foundation called Century One, where the author also apparently posts some of his articles. The point is, this author is the real deal, a legitimate archaeologist.

Jerusalem's Essene Gateway

Church of the Apostles Found on Mt. Zion - Pixner - BAR and CenturyOne Foundation

Church of the Apostles Found on Mt. Zion - Pixner - BAR and CenturyOne Foundation

www.centuryone.org

 

[daq]

Regarding the map in the OP, I would also add: note that the residence of the High Priest is also within the Essene Quarter. This was likely because in the time before the Hasmoneans usurped the Priesthood, when the High Priests were sons of Tzadok, the natural location for the palace or residence of the Kohen Gadol would have been alongside his brethren, the Tzadokim, and the Hessenim were Tzadokim. When the priesthood was taken over by the Hasmoneans the residence was probably simply left in the same place where it always was before.

Moreover, note that the author of the Gospel now known as John strongly implies that he himself was known to the High Priest, (John 18:15-16, likely speaking of himself in the third person as he also does elsewhere). This implies several intriguing possibilities if not both: for one, he is either a Kohen or somehow affiliated with the Kohanim, or he would not likely have known the High Priest personally. And secondly, he may have known the High Priest simply by proximity in living quarters, meaning he may also have either lived in the Essene Quarter or at least frequented that place often enough to be known by the High Priest who also had his residence there.

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

Regarding the map in the OP, I would also add: note that the residence of the High Priest is also within the Essene Quarter. This was likely because in the time before the Hasmoneans usurped the Priesthood, when the High Priests were sons of Tzadok, the natural location for the palace or residence of the Kohen Gadol would have been alongside his brethren, the Tzadokim, and the Hessenim were Tzadokim. When the priesthood was taken over by the Hasmoneans the residence was probably simply left in the same place where it always was before.

Moreover, note that the author of the Gospel now known as John strongly implies that he himself was known to the High Priest, (John 18:15-16, likely speaking of himself in the third person as he also does elsewhere). This implies several intriguing possibilities if not both: for one, he is either a Kohen or somehow affiliated with the Kohanim, or he would not likely have known the High Priest personally. And secondly, he may have known the High Priest simply by proximity in living quarters, meaning he may also have either lived in the Essene Quarter or at least frequented that place often enough to be known by the High Priest who also had his residence there.

I like that word #quarter", ..
Is it intended?

 

[daq]

I like that word #quarter", ..
Is it intended?

Surely it is intended, but I did not come up with that term: it is simply the name by which it has been called in more recent times. The word quarter has several different meanings in English, one being a fourth part, the other being used for a living quarter or more commonly, plural, as in the term living quarters. It is probably this second meaning which is intended, and not like a fourth part of the city but rather an area sectioned off for a specific sect or group of people for living quarters, as in "the Essene Quarter".

This is all the more reason why it is curious that the living quarters for the High Priest were in the Essene Quarter: does that mean the Sadducees might have been related in some way to the sons of Tzadok? the Tzadokim? It very well may be, however, the etymological origin of the term Sadducee is clouded with uncertainty, although we know the Sadducees were in charge of the Temple in the first century, (even by statements found in the Briyth Hadashah such as the Gospel accounts and the book of Acts).

Either way, when it came to theological constructs, beliefs, and understanding of the scripture, the Sadducees were nothing like the Tzadokim of Dameshek, a.k.a. Khirbet Qumran, (the modern Arabic name for the location where the DSS were discovered). The Sadducees neither confessed spirit, nor angels, nor even a resurrection, even according to the scripture, (Mat 22:23, Mrk 12:18, Luk 20:27, Acts 23:8), and Josephus moreover confirms the very same things. They were utterly carnal in their understanding of the Torah, and even rejected the oral law and traditions of the Pharisees, believing only what is written in the Hebrew scriptures, (albeit apparently not understanding much of any of it, as is apparent by their utterly carnal minded beliefs).

This vehement difference in theological positions and beliefs provides the most likely reasoning for the split between the Tzadokim or sons of Tzadok at Dameshek-Qumran and the Sadducees at Yerushalem: but again, that is only if indeed they were truly related at all. And if they were related, it was only by blood, not by theological positions and beliefs, (and it is also possible that the Sadducees were not legally blood related to Tzadok the Kohen at all, but only claimed they were, being usurpers, or at least considered usurpers by the true Tzadokim: we will probably never know the full truth either way).

The only records I know of pertaining to the origin of the Sadducees are the aggadic work Avot of Rabbi Natan, (Talmud), which tells the story of the two disciples of Antigonus of Sokho, (3rd Century BC), Zadok and Boethus, and the other source is Josephus, who makes reference to one named Sadduc along with Judas the Galilean at the time of the commencement of the first revolt over the taxation of Quirinius, governor of Syria, (following Archelaus having been deposed by the Romans, circa 6-7AD). There are those who speculate both ways and also a few other hypotheses. The Wikipedia article "Sadducees" gives a limited overview of some of these things.

 

[Yahudim]

Surely it is intended, but I did not come up with that term: it is simply the name by which it has been called in more recent times. The word quarter has several different meanings in English, one being a fourth part, the other being used for a living quarter or more commonly, plural, as in the term living quarters. It is probably this second meaning which is intended, and not like a fourth part of the city but rather an area sectioned off for a specific sect or group of people for living quarters, as in "the Essene Quarter".

This is all the more reason why it is curious that the living quarters for the High Priest were in the Essene Quarter: does that mean the Sadducees might have been related in some way to the sons of Tzadok? the Tzadokim? It very well may be, however, the etymological origin of the term Sadducee is clouded with uncertainty, although we know the Sadducees were in charge of the Temple in the first century, (even by statements found in the Briyth Hadashah such as the Gospel accounts and the book of Acts).

Either way, when it came to theological constructs, beliefs, and understanding of the scripture, the Sadducees were nothing like the Tzadokim of Dameshek, a.k.a. Khirbet Qumran, (the modern Arabic name for the location where the DSS were discovered). The Sadducees neither confessed spirit, nor angels, nor even a resurrection, even according to the scripture, (Mat 22:23, Mrk 12:18, Luk 20:27, Acts 23:8), and Josephus moreover confirms the very same things. They were utterly carnal in their understanding of the Torah, and even rejected the oral law and traditions of the Pharisees, believing only what is written in the Hebrew scriptures, (albeit apparently not understanding much of any of it, as is apparent by their utterly carnal minded beliefs).

This vehement difference in theological positions and beliefs provides the most likely reasoning for the split between the Tzadokim or sons of Tzadok at Dameshek-Qumran and the Sadducees at Yerushalem: but again, that is only if indeed they were truly related at all. And if they were related, it was only by blood, not by theological positions and beliefs, (and it is also possible that the Sadducees were not legally blood related to Tzadok the Kohen at all, but only claimed they were, being usurpers, or at least considered usurpers by the true Tzadokim: we will probably never know the full truth either way).

The only records I know of pertaining to the origin of the Sadducees are the aggadic work Avot of Rabbi Natan, (Talmud), which tells the story of the two disciples of Antigonus of Sokho, (3rd Century BC), Zadok and Boethus, and the other source is Josephus, who makes reference to one named Sadduc along with Judas the Galilean at the time of the commencement of the first revolt over the taxation of Quirinius, governor of Syria, (following Archelaus having been deposed by the Romans, circa 6-7AD). There are those who speculate both ways and also a few other hypotheses. The Wikipedia article "Sadducees" gives a limited overview of some of these things.

Absolutely Splendid! I greatly enjoyed the articles and concur with most of your conclusions. Concerning the location of the living quarters of the high priest, there is one account that I came across not too terribly long ago. Perhaps I'll be able to find it so that these remarks can be properly cited.

It had been reported that so many of the Hasmonian priests died during the temple service between 166 BCE and 70 CE, the Herodians insisted on keeping a priest of the Zadokim on hand for certain functions.

Give me a bit and I'll try and dig it up. Thanks again!

 

[daq]

Absolutely Splendid! I greatly enjoyed the articles and concur with most of your conclusions. Concerning the location of the living quarters of the high priest, there is one account that I came across not too terribly long ago. Perhaps I'll be able to find it so that these remarks can be properly cited.

It had been reported that so many of the Hasmonian priests died during the temple service between 166 BCE and 70 CE, the Herodians insisted on keeping a priest of the Zadokim on hand for certain functions.

Give me a bit and I'll try and dig it up. Thanks again!

That would be great! Thank you for doing that.

 

[Yahudim]

Memory just kicked in. I saw it on one of the Zadokim Calendar websites but I didn't bookmark it. (The sound of more rummaging around in the attic )

 

[Yahudim]

I'm sorry it is taking me so long to get back to you. There are a lot of things going on right now.

Concerning my earlier post, I now seem to remember seeing and hearing that information in a video. No telling how long it will take to find it, but I want to go back and review those videos again anyway.

Be well and be blessed.

 

[daq]

I'm sorry it is taking me so long to get back to you. There are a lot of things going on right now.

Concerning my earlier post, I now seem to remember seeing and hearing that information in a video. No telling how long it will take to find it, but I want to go back and review those videos again anyway.

Be well and be blessed.

It's all good, no hurry: and if you simply cannot get to it, believe me, I understand.

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

Surely it is intended, but I did not come up with that term: it is simply the name by which it has been called in more recent times. The word quarter has several different meanings in English, one being a fourth part, the other being used for a living quarter or more commonly, plural, as in the term living quarters. It is probably this second meaning which is intended, and not like a fourth part of the city but rather an area sectioned off for a specific sect or group of people for living quarters, as in "the Essene Quarter".

This is all the more reason why it is curious that the living quarters for the High Priest were in the Essene Quarter: does that mean the Sadducees might have been related in some way to the sons of Tzadok? the Tzadokim? It very well may be, however, the etymological origin of the term Sadducee is clouded with uncertainty, although we know the Sadducees were in charge of the Temple in the first century, (even by statements found in the Briyth Hadashah such as the Gospel accounts and the book of Acts).

Either way, when it came to theological constructs, beliefs, and understanding of the scripture, the Sadducees were nothing like the Tzadokim of Dameshek, a.k.a. Khirbet Qumran, (the modern Arabic name for the location where the DSS were discovered). The Sadducees neither confessed spirit, nor angels, nor even a resurrection, even according to the scripture, (Mat 22:23, Mrk 12:18, Luk 20:27, Acts 23:8), and Josephus moreover confirms the very same things. They were utterly carnal in their understanding of the Torah, and even rejected the oral law and traditions of the Pharisees, believing only what is written in the Hebrew scriptures, (albeit apparently not understanding much of any of it, as is apparent by their utterly carnal minded beliefs).

This vehement difference in theological positions and beliefs provides the most likely reasoning for the split between the Tzadokim or sons of Tzadok at Dameshek-Qumran and the Sadducees at Yerushalem: but again, that is only if indeed they were truly related at all. And if they were related, it was only by blood, not by theological positions and beliefs, (and it is also possible that the Sadducees were not legally blood related to Tzadok the Kohen at all, but only claimed they were, being usurpers, or at least considered usurpers by the true Tzadokim: we will probably never know the full truth either way).

The only records I know of pertaining to the origin of the Sadducees are the aggadic work Avot of Rabbi Natan, (Talmud), which tells the story of the two disciples of Antigonus of Sokho, (3rd Century BC), Zadok and Boethus, and the other source is Josephus, who makes reference to one named Sadduc along with Judas the Galilean at the time of the commencement of the first revolt over the taxation of Quirinius, governor of Syria, (following Archelaus having been deposed by the Romans, circa 6-7AD). There are those who speculate both ways and also a few other hypotheses. The Wikipedia article "Sadducees" gives a limited overview of some of these things.

That is a very insightful view of history.
May I offer a complimentary view of the relationship between john and kohanim, and family ?

 

[daq]

May I offer a complimentary view of the relationship between john and kohanim, and family ?

Yes, of course.

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

Surely it is intended, but I did not come up with that term: it is simply the name by which it has been called in more recent times. The word quarter has several different meanings in English, one being a fourth part, the other being used for a living quarter or more commonly, plural, as in the term living quarters. It is probably this second meaning which is intended, and not like a fourth part of the city but rather an area sectioned off for a specific sect or group of people for living quarters, as in "the Essene Quarter".

This is all the more reason why it is curious that the living quarters for the High Priest were in the Essene Quarter: does that mean the Sadducees might have been related in some way to the sons of Tzadok? the Tzadokim? It very well may be, however, the etymological origin of the term Sadducee is clouded with uncertainty, although we know the Sadducees were in charge of the Temple in the first century, (even by statements found in the Briyth Hadashah such as the Gospel accounts and the book of Acts).

Either way, when it came to theological constructs, beliefs, and understanding of the scripture, the Sadducees were nothing like the Tzadokim of Dameshek, a.k.a. Khirbet Qumran, (the modern Arabic name for the location where the DSS were discovered). The Sadducees neither confessed spirit, nor angels, nor even a resurrection, even according to the scripture, (Mat 22:23, Mrk 12:18, Luk 20:27, Acts 23:8), and Josephus moreover confirms the very same things. They were utterly carnal in their understanding of the Torah, and even rejected the oral law and traditions of the Pharisees, believing only what is written in the Hebrew scriptures, (albeit apparently not understanding much of any of it, as is apparent by their utterly carnal minded beliefs).

This vehement difference in theological positions and beliefs provides the most likely reasoning for the split between the Tzadokim or sons of Tzadok at Dameshek-Qumran and the Sadducees at Yerushalem: but again, that is only if indeed they were truly related at all. And if they were related, it was only by blood, not by theological positions and beliefs, (and it is also possible that the Sadducees were not legally blood related to Tzadok the Kohen at all, but only claimed they were, being usurpers, or at least considered usurpers by the true Tzadokim: we will probably never know the full truth either way).

The only records I know of pertaining to the origin of the Sadducees are the aggadic work Avot of Rabbi Natan, (Talmud), which tells the story of the two disciples of Antigonus of Sokho, (3rd Century BC), Zadok and Boethus, and the other source is Josephus, who makes reference to one named Sadduc along with Judas the Galilean at the time of the commencement of the first revolt over the taxation of Quirinius, governor of Syria, (following Archelaus having been deposed by the Romans, circa 6-7AD). There are those who speculate both ways and also a few other hypotheses. The Wikipedia article "Sadducees" gives a limited overview of some of these things.

Family:
Luke ch 1
[ 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.]

Herod being of questionable lineage"

[ 36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.]

During the time of herod and his sadduccee court of usurped?
Perveiw> Not only did herod falsely invoke the kingly throne of yhdh. His lackeys falsely/arrogantly invoked the name throne of tzadok.?

I've read of opinions concerning author john and his relationship with the priesthood. And agree that he was a disciple of john the levite Baptist.
With that view it isnt strange that john acted as a witness to The miracles falsely accused of being wtichcraft.
As per account they (levite) dismissed the case.
Mark 14
[55 And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.]

So then the suddeccees were forced to differ to a roman court of dogs.

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

Family:
Luke ch 1
[ 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.]

Herod being of questionable lineage"

[ 36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.]

During the time of herod and his sadduccee court of usurped?
Perveiw> Not only did herod falsely invoke the kingly throne of yhdh. His lackeys falsely/arrogantly invoked the name throne of tzadok.?

I've read of opinions concerning author john and his relationship with the priesthood. And agree that he was a disciple of john the levite Baptist.
With that view it isnt strange that john acted as a witness to The miracles falsely accused of being wtichcraft.
As per account they (levite) dismissed the case.
Mark 14
[55 And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.]

So then the suddeccees were forced to differ to a roman court of dogs.

The sadduccee court of herod produced a charge against the lineage with a perverse interpretation of TRH.

יז מְכַשֵּׁפָה, לֹא תְחַיֶּה.

17 Thou shalt not suffer a sorceress to live.

After all they denied spirit, and life after death. An obvious position of those that ignore consequences after the
Grave>shl

 

[daq]

Family:
Luke ch 1
[ 5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.]

Herod being of questionable lineage"

[ 36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.]

During the time of herod and his sadduccee court of usurped?
Perveiw> Not only did herod falsely invoke the kingly throne of yhdh. His lackeys falsely/arrogantly invoked the name throne of tzadok.?

I've read of opinions concerning author john and his relationship with the priesthood. And agree that he was a disciple of john the levite Baptist.
With that view it isnt strange that john acted as a witness to The miracles falsely accused of being wtichcraft.
As per account they (levite) dismissed the case.
Mark 14
[55 And the chief priests and all the council sought for witness against Jesus to put him to death; and found none.]

So then the suddeccees were forced to differ to a roman court of dogs.

What I find most interesting in all of this, and related to the OP, is that we have multiple historical sources reporting that Yakob the Tzaddik actually wore the breastplate of righteous judgment and entered into the sanctuary: if he was not forbidden to do so then there is more to the story than meets the eye on the surface.

Ahron took to wife Elisheba the sister of Nahshon, the prince of tribe Yhudah, (Exo 6:23), and that means that, genetically speaking, every son and daughter of Ahron is of both Levi and Yhudah. The LXX version of Exo 6:23 gives the same spelling for Elisheba as used in the Luke passage for Elisabeth: they are the same name, so Elisabeth is simply a direct Greek transliteration of Elisheba.

Moreover the Luke passage states that Elisabeth was of the daughters of Ahron. Moreover we are also informed in Luke that Maryah was a close relative or cousin of Elisabeth, (Elisheba). We therefore have a close connection between Yhudah and Levi from the Torah and confirmed in the Gospel of Luke, (even genealogically speaking, the two are intertwined, (the meaning of the name Levi)).

There is a more complete history of Zekaryah the Kohen to be found in Apocalypse Yakob, (a.k.a. the Protoevangelium of James). They slew Zekaryah the Kohen, (ben Berekyah, son of the Blessing of Yah), between the altar and the naos, meaning that they slit his throat, (the altar is the adamah-soil of the heart and the naos is the mind or house of the Most High).

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

What I find most interesting in all of this, and related to the OP, is that we have multiple historical sources reporting that Yakob the Tzaddik actually wore the breastplate of righteous judgment and entered into the sanctuary: if he was not forbidden to do so then there is more to the story than meets the eye on the surface.

Ahron took to wife Elisheba the sister of Nahshon, the prince of tribe Yhudah, (Exo 6:23), and that means that, genetically speaking, every son and daughter of Ahron is of both Levi and Yhudah. The LXX version of Exo 6:23 gives the same spelling for Elisheba as used in the Luke passage for Elisabeth: they are the same name, so Elisabeth is simply a direct Greek transliteration of Elisheba.

Moreover the Luke passage states that Elisabeth was of the daughters of Ahron. Moreover we are also informed in Luke that Maryah was a close relative or cousin of Elisabeth, (Elisheba). We therefore have a close connection between Yhudah and Levi from the Torah and confirmed in the Gospel of Luke, (even genealogically speaking, the two are intertwined, (the meaning of the name Levi)).

There is a more complete history of Zekaryah the Kohen to be found in Apocalypse Yakob, (a.k.a. the Protoevangelium of James). They slew Zekaryah the Kohen, (ben Berekyah, son of the Blessing of Yah), between the altar and the naos, meaning that they slit his throat, (the altar is the adamah-soil of the heart and the naos is the mind or house of the Most High).

I hope that you understand, "throat slicing" is an inapropriate response in our conversation. And could be interpreted as a subtle threat.
Other than that odd comment
I'd love to compliment the breastplate.

If permitted of course

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

Surely it is intended, but I did not come up with that term: it is simply the name by which it has been called in more recent times. The word quarter has several different meanings in English, one being a fourth part, the other being used for a living quarter or more commonly, plural, as in the term living quarters. It is probably this second meaning which is intended, and not like a fourth part of the city but rather an area sectioned off for a specific sect or group of people for living quarters, as in "the Essene Quarter".

This is all the more reason why it is curious that the living quarters for the High Priest were in the Essene Quarter: does that mean the Sadducees might have been related in some way to the sons of Tzadok? the Tzadokim? It very well may be, however, the etymological origin of the term Sadducee is clouded with uncertainty, although we know the Sadducees were in charge of the Temple in the first century, (even by statements found in the Briyth Hadashah such as the Gospel accounts and the book of Acts).

Either way, when it came to theological constructs, beliefs, and understanding of the scripture, the Sadducees were nothing like the Tzadokim of Dameshek, a.k.a. Khirbet Qumran, (the modern Arabic name for the location where the DSS were discovered). The Sadducees neither confessed spirit, nor angels, nor even a resurrection, even according to the scripture, (Mat 22:23, Mrk 12:18, Luk 20:27, Acts 23:8), and Josephus moreover confirms the very same things. They were utterly carnal in their understanding of the Torah, and even rejected the oral law and traditions of the Pharisees, believing only what is written in the Hebrew scriptures, (albeit apparently not understanding much of any of it, as is apparent by their utterly carnal minded beliefs).

This vehement difference in theological positions and beliefs provides the most likely reasoning for the split between the Tzadokim or sons of Tzadok at Dameshek-Qumran and the Sadducees at Yerushalem: but again, that is only if indeed they were truly related at all. And if they were related, it was only by blood, not by theological positions and beliefs, (and it is also possible that the Sadducees were not legally blood related to Tzadok the Kohen at all, but only claimed they were, being usurpers, or at least considered usurpers by the true Tzadokim: we will probably never know the full truth either way).

The only records I know of pertaining to the origin of the Sadducees are the aggadic work Avot of Rabbi Natan, (Talmud), which tells the story of the two disciples of Antigonus of Sokho, (3rd Century BC), Zadok and Boethus, and the other source is Josephus, who makes reference to one named Sadduc along with Judas the Galilean at the time of the commencement of the first revolt over the taxation of Quirinius, governor of Syria, (following Archelaus having been deposed by the Romans, circa 6-7AD). There are those who speculate both ways and also a few other hypotheses. The Wikipedia article "Sadducees" gives a limited overview of some of these things.

A quarter of 12 is 3. Ie upper room and 3rd heaven..?
Code talk?

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

A quarter of 12 is 3. Ie upper room and 3rd heaven..?
Code talk?

Pharisees vs Sadducce in the essene quarter?
I wonder If paul was there during the first trial..?

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

Am I off topic?

 

[daq]

I hope that you understand, "throat slicing" is an inapropriate response in our conversation. And could be interpreted as a subtle threat.
Other than that odd comment
I'd love to compliment the breastplate.

If permitted of course

My comment had only to do with the Testimony of the Master and what he says and teaches about it and what is also written in Apocalypse Yakob, (which was one of the reasons I linked to it).

Matthew 23:34-35 KJV
34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
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 [G3485 ναος, naos] and the altar.

To cut off the voice of another is to proverbially slit his throat, especially a Chief Kohen, just as Herod defrocked Matthias ben Theophilus, the Chief Kohen, right before Herod himself died.

 

[be(t)et lamed resh]

My comment had only to do with the Testimony of the Master and what he says and teaches about it and what is also written in Apocalypse Yakob, (which was one of the reasons I linked to it).

Matthew 23:34-35 KJV
34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
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 [G3485 ναος, naos] and the altar.

To cut off the voice of another is to proverbially slit his throat, especially a Chief Kohen, just as Herod defrocked Matthias ben Theophilus, the Chief Kohen, right before Herod himself died.

Persecution is a form of strict blessings.
Never was there a preist that bent the knee to A "herod' .Greek pig"!
History..?