Zechariah was to be the last Kohen Gadol of the Age of Aries

He was deposed ("cut off between the altar and the Temple") by Herod, at which time his son John would be likewise "beheaded" (cut off) from his appointment to the Temple.

It is easy for the gospel writer(s) to write about a series of events that took place over thirty (Mark) to sixty (Matthew, Luke and John) years earlier in a way that makes it appear as if they were writing about the fulfillment of prophecies about the past future that occurred long before the time that the gospels were written. The New Testament claims that immediately after Elizabeth gave birth, she told the admirers who had come to marvel over the birth of her son, that he "shall be called / will be called John" (John 1:60). Had she actually stated such, she should be considered a prophet. There were no witnesses to uphold this naming drama ever having taken place, and in fact, most if not all of the disciples weren't even born at the time of John's naming! So where did the source of this supposed event come from? Simply put, this was a false historical event that was manufactured decades later in order to posthumously foreshadow the fact that the lineage of Zechariah would be cut off later in the story.

It is stated that Zechariah's and Elizabeth's son shall be called John, which means that he would later be called John at some point in the future, as opposed to the errant belief that he was named John at birth. It is easy for someone in 2024, for example, to write a book dated back to 1809 about Abraham Lincoln's birth and naming and say that "his father wanted to name him Abraham, but his mom said no, for he shall be called President". While bringing up the name Abraham, how much easier would this have been regarding the Hebrew patriarch, in that he was born Abram: imagine for one moment, being at his naming ceremony, and his father wanting to name him "Abram" but his mother insisting "he shall be called Abraham"... would she have been wrong? Sarai's name was changed to Sarah: Jacob became Israel, and on and on and on: John the Baptist was not named John at birth - he was named Zechariah, which means Baptism (Zechar) Lord (Iah). In fact, by calling him "The Baptist", Christians actually are unwittingly referring to him as Zechariah.

Is it not interesting that Christians don't seem to really wonder whatever happened to the godfather of the woman who immaculately conceived the Son of God? Why not? Because the Catholic Church manipulated the gospels to keep the flock blind to such insightful curiosities. For context, it must be realized that according to the New Testament, the Father of John the Baptist raised the "Virgin Mary" as though she were his own daughter. Think about that for a moment: by New Testament accounts, Mary was raised by Zechariah and Elizabeth as though she was John the Baptist's older sister. So why wasn't Mary living with Zechariah and Elizabeth at the time of Jesus' conception? Because she was betrothed to Joseph? We are led to believe that Zechariah, a High Priest well up in years, would send Mary out to the home of an elderly man named Joseph at a time roughly coinciding with the time when Zechariah and his barren wife Elizabeth would have needed Mary's assistance the most (due to Elizabeth's pregnancy). Yet the New testament even states that Mary went to Zechariah's house while he was being censored at roughly the same time that she became "immaculately" pregnant without mentioning the fact that she was likewise raised in that same house for years prior to then.

Nothing is really known about Joseph, which is just as suspicious as the fact that Joseph accompanied John, Jesus, Mary and Elizabeth to Egypt, yet interestingly enough, Zechariah was absent. As a matter of fact, Joseph and Zechariah are never placed in each other's presence in the Gospels, even though Zechariah raised Mary as his own daughter, and as such, it would have been Zechariah whom would have given her hand to Joseph and performed their wedding. The truth is, the gospel writers felt a need to remove Mary from Zechariah's household for a reason, and to likewise downplay the true significance of Mary's visit to Zechariah's house as though Mary was just going to visit her cousin Elizabeth. The reason for such necessity in their minds is easily made apparent: Mary was the mother of Zechariah's son. Where was Zechariah when the firstborns were taken to Egypt to escape Herod? The truth is, he was right there with them the whole time.

Had their been a Jesus apart from John, and had his mother been Mary the cousin of Elizabeth, he would have certainly been aware that his mother was raised by Zechariah, and as such, Zechariah would have played a significant role is Jesus' upbringing in the Temple, meaning that Zechariah would have carried a profound significance in Jesus' spiritual upbringing, none of which was ever recorded in the gospels. Why not?

The Old Testament records regarding the OT prophet Zechariah: "In rabbinical literature, Zechariah was the son-in-law of the king, and, being also a priest, prophet, and judge, he dared censure the monarch. He was killed in the priests' courtyard of the Temple on a Sabbath which was likewise the Day of Atonement." The Day of Atonement murder of the OT Zechariah falls at precisely the same time of the year, at the same time of day, on the same exact holiday and at the exact same place that/where Zechariah the father of John the Baptist was when Gabriel announced that Elizabeth had conceived! Furthermore, from that moment on, Zechariah was unable to speak (he was censured)! Still further, the Old Testament Zechariah was "murdered" for censuring the monarch - just as Zechariah in the New Testament was "censured" for "doubting Gabriel" - which was also what later happened to John the Baptist for censuring Herod's and Herodias' adulterous affair! Being "unable to speak", "beheaded" and "killed between the altar and the sanctuary" are all references to being "cut off" from the priesthood.