Hi

Your implicit slight minimizing Jesus Christ to just another Zealot like Judas of Gamala shows your ignorance and explicit bias of the subject. Read Acts 5:36-37 where Gamaliel clearly distinguishes the prior Zealot movements to the Christ ministry. It’s not a reference for you to come up with your own theories to deny the divinity of Christ! Btw, your cutaways showing a cartoon of yourself is vain and ridiculous to say the least.

@@branchofthevine779 My friend we don’t need to literally just gain source from the Bible about Jesus, The only Best documents about Jesus is from a Jew. We should take sources about Jesus from the Bible where that basically Jesus is God although he got killed by the Romans and he can walk on water and said that poor people are dogs

@@maulanakarman8955 You are not understanding because you are unlearned on totality of holy scripture. Mr. Aronow is clearly referencing Book of Acts with the comment on Judas Gamala not the Chazal! Your blatantly false Metatron, the broader Babylonian texts or your commentators will not save, ever!

@@branchofthevine779 Do you just call me unlearned? I don’t need to believe in the Bible because the Bible says Jesus is God and he walks on water. m.kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gNicqLyQu6mopoE.html

On the contrary, silver!

You being Jordanian is of proximity to Israel, especially Reuben, Gad and Manasseh, do you think you have Hebrew Israelite ancestry?

:: plays rave music, flashes strobe lights ::

There were a lot of uncle-niece marriages in the Habsburg line, especially in Spain.

@@SamAronow Oh boy, l should have paid more attention to their family tree. I somehow assumed that it was just a lot of cousins, including first cousins. Edit: Now I know that it's apparently something called an avunculate marriage and that it is technically still legal in some countries. I don't feel comfortable with this knowledge, maybe I subconsciously repressed it?

@@SamAronow hi

@@Artur_M. It's Biblically allowed.

It's very interesting because we actually saw the exact same pattern of a strongly established Jewish religious figure proclaiming a less established one as the Messiah over 16 centuries later, although in that case Nathan of Gaza was younger than Shabbatai Tzvi.

Highly unlikely that he was his cousin

It’s not the only problem with this video.

He corrected himself above.

They made a mistake? That happens all the time. Even using the Bible as a baseline, the Anno Mundi count in the Hebresiw Calendar is off by a couple centuries because the Rabbinic academies of the 6th century massively underestimated the lengths of the Achaemenid and Hellenistic periods.

Hillel is a illegitimate heretic.

Makes sense that a Jewish channel wouldn’t use annotation derived from “in the year of our Lord,” no?

@@dzmcroy lots of Jews know that Jesus is The Christ according to the scriptures

Also, the 3,000 that Archelaus killed in the temple during Passover were violent revolutionaries trying to overthrow him who had themselves holed up in the temple, the situation wasn't exactly Archelaus' fault.

Okay, so I just popped open my copy of Josephus' Jewish war and realized that I was in error on my first point. I'll quote the relevant portion below. Book 1.667 At this meeting Ptolemy, the man to whom the king had entrusted his signet ring, took the platform. He began with a eulogy of the late king and reassuring words to the civilian population, then read out the letter which Herod had left for his troops, making an insistent appeal for their loyalty to his successor. 668 After the letter, he opened and read the codicils to Herod’s will. These specified that Philip was to inherit Trachonitis and the surrounding districts, Antipas (as we have mentioned earlier) was to be tetrarch, and Archelaus king. 669 Archelaus was required to take Herod’s personal ring to Caesar, together with the governing instruments of the kingdom under seal, as Caesar was the executor of all his dispositions and the guarantor of his will. In all other particulars his previous will was to remain valid. Book 2.92 So the Jews made the prosecution case and concluded with this petition. Nicolaus then rose to rebut the charges made against the kings, laying the blame on the inherently anarchic character of the Jewish people and their automatic resistance to the authority of their kings. He also had hard words for the relatives of Archelaus who had defected to join his accusers. 93 At the time Caesar did no more than listen to both parties and then dismiss the assembly. His decision came a few days later. He gave half of the kingdom to Archelaus with the title of ethnarch, promising to promote him king if he proved himself worthy. 94 The other half he divided into two tetrarchies and gave them to two other sons of Herod, one to Philip, and the other to Antipas who was disputing the throne with Archelaus. 95 The domain given to Antipas was Peraea and Galilee, producing a revenue of 200 talents, and Philip was allocated Batanaea, Trachonitis, Auranitis, and some parts of Zeno’s estate in the Paneas area, with a revenue of 100 talents. 96 Archelaus’ ethnarchy comprised Idumaea, all of Judaea, and Samaritis, which had its tribute reduced by a quarter as a reward for not joining the general revolt. 97 The cities subjected to Archelaus* were Strato’s Tower, Sebaste, Joppa, and Jerusalem: the Greek cities of Gaza, Gadara, and Hippus were detached from the kingdom and annexed to Syria. The revenue from the territory given to Archelaus amounted to 400 talents. 98 In addition to the legacy left her in the king’s will, Salome was made mistress of Jamnia, Azotus, and Phasaelis, and Caesar also presented her with the palace at Ascalon: the combined revenue from all these sources gave her an income of sixty talents, but this estate of hers was made subject to Archelaus’ jurisdiction. 99 Each of the other members of Herod’s family received the legacy specified in his will. As a separate gift, Caesar settled 500,000 silver drachmas on Herod’s two unmarried daughters,* and arranged their marriages to the sons of Pheroras. 100 After dividing the estate Caesar also shared out among the family his own personal legacy from Herod, which amounted to 1,000 talents, retaining only a few articles of no great value as keepsakes in memory of the late king.

I misunderstood the nature of the offense: Archelaus had violated levirate marriage because Glaphyra was the widow of his half-brother Alexander but had already had children by Alexander.

Can I suggest adding corrective annotations to videos? For the errors addressed correction video, just a message with the relevant link could suffice. (Cheers for this absolutely epic series. I've learnt so much)

Citation needed.

I highly doubt a group of religious fanatics can be considered "socialist".