Did Jesus Actually Exist? Rabbi Tovia Singer's Evidence and Conclusion will Surprise You

There is significant body of literature devoted to proving that Jesus never existed. Proponents of this position are called “mythicists” because they believe that Jesus is a myth. Most New Testament Scholars argue that mythicists are dead wrong. Rabbi Tovia Singer’s opinion and his compelling evidence on this provocative topic will shock you. www.toviasinger.tv/
‪@NetivOnline‬ Netiv Torah Center
Let’s Get Biblical Study Guide (Volume 1 & 2) outreachjudaism.org/shop/lets...
Help us combat aggressive evangelization in Israel: outreachjudaism.org/partners/
outreachjudaism.org/ www.toviasinger.tv/

[@joelvisser2164]

many many many Torah blessings to you Rabbi keep on going with the good work.. i have a huge bloodlust (figuratively) )) for more lectures like this.. truth above believe.. Shalom

[@joelvisser2164]

Arikm7 ofc)) it is figuratively))) But R'singer is awesome))thats ol))

[@Daniel24445]

Oh I'm sure it's more than figurative.

[@nonegiven9727]

This is your Rabbi the Pharisees. Your all falling into a ditch and don't know it.

[@randolphsloan2263]

The lamb of Elohim is the blood that removes sin. Yahshuah is the lamb

[@joelvisser4694]

@@randolphsloan2263 ofc, in the pegan world it is..not in Tenach.

[@shawnroberts4435]

At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians: They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food - but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.[10 There are several accounts by NON Christian authors who validated Christ so for you to say there is no acknowledgement of Christ outside of the New Testament is a lie but I'm sure you know this.

[@ejv1963]

He did say "contemporaneous" , but unfortunately , you chose not to hear that. Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny the younger were reporting in third person, 60 to 90 years after Jesus, about the beliefs held by a religious group. Marcus Velleius Paterculus, Pliny the Elder and Seneca the Elder were all contemporary to Jesus and Tiberius, who wrote in detail about Tiberius' reign, with no mention of earthquakes, zombies in city streets or a missing body in 30 AD.

[@screamtoasigh9984]

christian cult played with the writings as well. Let's not pretend the fox hasn't been playing, stealing and corrupting the henhouse - after they killed and stole from the Jews.

[@andrewmobley7723]

There are Jewish sources too which the Rabbi should know about. I'm suspecting dishonesty.

[@mandyvoss1966]

@@andrewmobley7723do you have a link to those sources?

[@myazleoful]

_Roman empire creation as they create zeus came down to earth from heaven to impregnate mortal woman and have a son name hercules this hercules was half man and half god with miracles power than any other man mmm does it seem familiar?_

[@josephnyongesa193]

Baruk Hashem! May he continue to grant you good health so that you may continue to be a light to the nations. Its mind bogling how I did not notice these plot devices for so long. Love the song at the end.

[@richardfrascone1577]

You have the same thought process as Lawrence Krauss. I enjoyed watching you. Thanks

[@sleeexs]

@Iyas kelu The archeology checks out the Genesis account

[@kkirchhevel]

It is interesting to consider that Jacobs sons kept the truth hidden from their father from the time they first deceived him saying till us is this your son's coat? They must have withheld the truth from their wives and children for fear that their father would find out.

[@stuartshepherd2999]

Slaughter of Innocents In Matthew's Gospel, Chapter 2, verses 13-18, part of the Christmas Story is called ""the Slaughter of the Innocents" At verse 8, King Herod tells the Magi..... "Go and search carefully for the Child; and when you have found Him, report to me, so that I too may come and worship Him." But the Magi find Jesus, don't tell King Herod, and go home. When Herod realizes he has been duped, he is furious and gives the order to kill all the boys, two years old and under, who live in Bethlehem and its vicinity. But an angel appears to Joseph tells him to take Jesus to Egypt. """And [Jesus] was there [In Egypt] until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son"""(Matthew 2:15) The words spoken by the prophet, which Matthew claims were fulfilled at Matthew 2:15 are found at Hosea 11:1....... """When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.""" As you can clearly see, Matthew's supposed fulfillment is totally bogus. The complete verse Matthew quotes is not about Jesus or the Messiah, but is a verse about Israel being called out of Egypt during the time of Pharaoh. So King Herod slaughters all the innocent children under two years of age, and Matthew again quotes the OT to supposedly show that Scripture has been fulfilled. (Matthew 2:17-18) Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, """In Ramah was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.""" The first problem with this supposed fulfillment is that Ramah is a town located about 5 miles North of Jerusalem, and Bethlehem is a town located about 5 miles South of Jerusalem. This quote isn't even about Bethlehem. I purposely mention Jerusalem, in case a Christian thinks that 10 miles from Bethlehem is still in the "vicinity." If all the innocents in Jerusalem, a city, were slaughtered it certainly would have made the news. As it was, there is absolutely no mention of this event by any Historian, not even the famous Jewish Historian, Josephus, who very carefully and completely wrote about King Herod. The next problem with this supposed fulfillment is that the woman weeping is Rachel, one of the wives of Jacob, the father of the 12 tribes of Israel. Bethlehem is in the tribal land allocated to the tribe of Judah. King David, was from the tribe of Judah, and had been born in Bethlehem. The problem is that Rachel was not the mother of Judah. Leah was the mother of Judah. If symbolically a woman was weeping for her children it should have been Leah, weeping for the dead children of Judah, and not Rachel. But there is an even GREATER problem with Matthew's supposed Scripture fulfillment. I will quote the Scripture, Jeremiah 31:15-17, in its entirety.....See if you can spot this GREAT problem? Thus saith the LORD; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rachel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not. Thus saith the LORD; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the LORD; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, saith the LORD, that thy children shall come again to their own border. This Scripture isn't even about dead children. This Scripture is about children who were taken into captivity, and would be restored to their homeland. Matthew totally misquotes Scripture.

[@benlassu1880]

Nicely done!

[@theautoman22]

Another good one is Mathew 1:22 Jesus to be born of a virgin and called Emanuel to fulfill a prophecy. This prophecy is at Isaiah chapter 7:14 yet go back and read the whole chapter of 7 and you’ll see it’s about a boy during the time of king Ahaz and how Ahaz enemies from Syria will be dispatched before the boy completes a thing .

[@rabeccahhansen3167]

I disagree with the concept that professors or those who have devoted a lifetime of study to Jesus and/or his existence are absolute and otherwise undeniable without reducing that life of study to meaning nothing.

[@pat501278]

Wonderfully informative, as usual. Thanks, Rabbi.

[@CaptainFarthouse]

It really wasnt, his argument is deeply flawed actually.

[@addalavenkataratnam5449]

@@CaptainFarthouse pl explain how ?

[@pentirah5282]

I have come to the same conclusion as you. For this reason I have long thought that both the opinion that he existed and the opposite, that he did not, are correct. What I have found mysterious is: what happened to turn this individual's teachings/beliefs into a cult? As you say, there were various individuals at that time claiming to be messiah and gaining followers. Only one other claim to messiah-ship seems to have made any impact, or is even remembered. What I often ponder on is: what happened that made this sect last and eventually grow into a major religion? There must have been something quite unique about this one individual, his actions or the beliefs. That is the one thing that I cannot get around. History may have turned him into something other than what he actually was! - but was something about him so different that he did not pass into historic oblivion like all the other self-acclaimed messiahs. Even before Constantine made it the state religion, Christianity was one of those followed in Rome and seems to have been already established - but possibly in its original form, whatever that was. Thank you for very interesting talk.

[@druidriley3163]

What kept it around was brute force. The pagans when they held power, tolerated Christianity. When Christians gained the power, they didn't return the favor. They outlawed paganism on pain of death and kept that stricture in place for the next 1700 years. Now that Christians can no longer convert or force people to be Christians at the point of the sword, you see plenty of people drifting away, churches closing. This is what would have naturally happened 1700 years ago had it not been for Christians forcing their religion on others.

[@pentirah5282]

@@druidriley3163 Yes- like the Muslims have always gained converts by the use of violence. From what I deduce from historic accounts, the early Christians were not hostile but rather mild as they were obeying Jesus' teachings. However, after Constantine imposed his official Christianity by putting together a hotch-potch of pagan and Christian beliefs, then it became militant. I believe this hostility towards pagan religions had it's roots in Constantine's wish to eliminate paganism and have only one religion for Rome - his trumped up version of Christianity. I suspect it may be that the very first teachings of Yeshua were radically different from what we now think of a Christianity. Remember, the early Gnostic Christians were also persecuted along with the pagans.

[@druidriley3163]

@@pentirah5282 - I've read that some of the early Christians were mild, but not all of them. Many embraced Jesus' martyrdom as a goal in life to get to heaven and pursued it, little better than modern day religious nuts who blow themselves up for their god. This became so problematic, once the Christians started to gain power, the early Church leaders had to preach against their followers pursuing that path. Constantine was a life-long pagan, he only made it so Christianity was on par with the local pagan religions, he didn't actively oppress any religious faith.

[@daspecialist1220]

I feel that christianity is appealing because its a quick fix. Beleive and be saved. Not too much focus on repent and follow Gods commands. Infact little by little the belief to follow his commands given at sinai have been swept under the rug (so to speak)

[@pentirah5282]

@@daspecialist1220 Not too much focus on repent and follow God's commands? Have you ever heard of the Jehovah's Witnesses?

[@jarvinmendez-castro3763]

Like always I'm more than pleased with your teachings, blessed be Hashem !!!

[@goldengun9970]

@Iyas kelu oh so your angry when the credibility of jesus is attacked but you don't mind attacking jews wherever you can find them like on israel news sites? Caught you idol worshipper. I caught you

[@LaymanScholar]

Even though I am only 7 minutes in, and agreeing with the rabbi, I would hope that he applies the same kind of logic to the existence of Moses as a historical figure, when the very same lack of evidence for anything related to him just isn't there.

[@EliezerPennywhistler]

+LaymanScholar Why? Can't you tell the difference between a prophet and the "Son of God"? Don't Jews say that if Moses had not been born God would have given the Torah through Ezra?

[@72Yonatan]

Actually, there is evidence for the Exodus itself, not only Moses. But you have to know where to look and you must avoid the tourist traps in the Sinai Peninsula where some monks built a monastery and called it Mount Sinai, thus the name Sinai Peninsula. But that is not the Jewish tradition. Go back to the text and you will see that they followed the same route that Moses himself took to reach Midian, except that he traveled only by land, whereas the Benei Israel took a detour south into a large canyon which we call Wadi here in the middle east. That canyon brought them to a beach head called Nuseibeh in modern Arabic, and from that beach they crossed the parted Yam Suf. On our maps the Yam Suf forms the shape of a Y on both sides of the Sinai Peninsula. From satelllite photos, it is easy to see that there is an underwater raised bridge of sand at that point reaching across the sea to northern Arabia, or Midian as it was called in ancient times. The Hebrew bible also calls the Midianites Ishmaelim, see the war of King David with them where both terms are used interchangeably. Ishmaelim are Arabs, descendants of Abraham through Ishmael, the first born son of Abraham. Also, since wooden chariot wheels would not have lasted for three millennia underwater, what evidence is found now, at this late date? Well, one of the chariot wheels was covered in gold, and it is unchanged and not rusted. The wooden wheel itself has gone, but its covering is intact underwater. And the other wheels and axle assemblies that were scattered underwater had coral growth on them, which protected the shapes of the assemblies. 90 degree angles are not formed by natural coral growth, so that is further evidence. For those who believe, no evidence outside of the text is needed, it seems to be the case with most Christians. And the Catholic Church has conveniently retired most of her claimed relics in the last century since some were proven to be frauds. But that is consistent with the magician entertainer caricature of Jesus found in the gospel accounts.

[@dougzembiec9995]

There is no evidence of a red sea crossing... Eg 50 000 dead Egyptians, their chariots, spear, shields at the bottom of the red sea. Extra ordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence.

[@EliezerPennywhistler]

`Have you looked? Do you know of anyone who has?

[@dougzembiec9995]

Eliezer Pennywhistler plenty have looked including the Christian fraudster Ron Wyatt. The ark = Myth Garden of Eden = Myth Moses = Myth Abraham = Myth Miracles of Jesus = Myth

[@lynx777]

I love the "Bugs Bunny" analogy....cracked me up, I'm going to use that. Casper the Friendly Ghost is fantastic!

[@lynx777]

@Leonardo DaVinci how about the prophecy about rebuilding the temple and then says forget it I'll do it the next time I appear...pooooof no witnesses... but there's a ton of conjecture to assume any of the prophecies are for today especially when he never did give a timeline, so when Jesus says no man to know the time or day Christians are calling Jesus a liar claiming they know the time and day. If you close your eyes you can pretend anything Jesus said was true..... and let me throw one more wrench in the machine.... you can look this up. Jesus biological father was a man by the name of Tiberius Pantera... Jesus was of the House of Tiberius under Tiberius Caesar meaning Jesus psychological operations were funded... the tyberians originated in Palestine from the region of Galilee, and confused for being Jewish because they were actually the natives of the region. This is why you'll discover the Palestinians claim Jesus was a Palestinian because Tiberius Caesar and the Tiberians were Palestinuans... this is why Jesus ministry was in Galilee... Jewish people don't originate from there and there wasn't much of a Jewish population in the area. There's a whole lot of information on this that you cannot find in a Christian bookstore.

[@lynx777]

@Sir Isaac Newton Christianity wasn't self-serving, there is only one government that had complete control to push the ideology and it's not because they were good or nice people.

[@lynx777]

@tate rosemary I'm Objectively...Ramses is RA-MOSES because Hebrews drop the vowels, meaning we who speak English pronounce it wrong, and there was more than one. Also Egypt was a much smaller territory and did not occupy much of the territory we think of as being Egypt today.

[@Reindeer911]

One of the biggest problems with Christianity is that there is no one that verifiably claims to have been around at the time of Jesus and witnessed any of the events surrounding him. Meaning the entire New Testament is all based on hear-say.

[@carlanderson2468]

The same can be said about Adam and Eve, Noah, Abraham and Moses, OH that's right it's in the Bible 🍷😒

[@screamtoasigh9984]

@@carlanderson2468 Jews passed down their family history - their heritage and ancestry - christians passed down a game of telephone.

[@Ingrid_Abrams]

@@carlanderson2468 Then why would you even bother listening ir following Rabbi Tovia's videos. and take time out to comment? LMAO

[@carlanderson2468]

@24 Dorsey Street Studios© I believe in the stories of the torah, all I'm saying is that the founding fathers history in much much older than the life of Yeshua. It would take grater faith to believe in the stories of the founding fathers than it would Yeshua, common sense.

[@badaboom2321]

@@carlanderson2468incorrect. We know where Abraham and Adam are buried today that alone proves they existed. Also they found Noah’s ark in Turkey there is 0 physical proof that Jesus ever existed

[@crusader92cominghome]

I'm not an expert but I think the criterion of embarrassment can also be used to indicate Jesus existed. For example, at one point, when John the Baptist was in jail, he sent out his disciples to ask Jesus if he was the Messiah or if they should look for someone else. That's highly embarrassing since supposedly John the Baptist baptized Jesus earlier in some sort of spectacular fashion. So if the writer wrote that John had doubts later, it's probably true, and therefore Jesus probably existed. Also, Paul clearly had problems with the original apostles of Jesus according to his letters, especially when Paul writes that he called Peter (Cephas) a hypocrite. It's an embarrassing episode in Christian literature, so probably both Jesus and Peter existed, in my opinion. I could cite other examples.

[@prognosis8768]

This is a very interesting and compelling talk. However, the text that Google has added at the bottom is absolutely nuts. It is only vaguely similar to what is being said a lot of the time. For instance, at one point, the phrase "Jesus of Nazareth" is shown as "oh geez at Mazars" and "King David was born in Bethlehem" gets turned into "Ching name was born meant bomb". If you want to be able to concentrate on what Rabbi Singer is saying, I would suggest turning off the Closed Captioning.

[@glennshrom5801]

That Jesus died so soon was likely due to the scourging. The scourging alone was able to kill somebody - loss of blood, internal organs exposed and torn, etc. (If not at that moment, from later infections.) What is amazing is that Jesus survived the scourging and carrying of the cross to be alive at Calvary where he was then crucified on top of the scourging. It was like a double death sentence. He lost a lot of blood. A crucifixion alone would not have resulted in the quick loss of blood that Jesus experienced, for the spear to go into his side only a few hours later and to get the recorded result.

[@geraldamos292]

Pure speculation and not historic..not one bit of proof

[@samiannarino7138]

Rabbi you are the best

[@mikev4621]

To categorically claim that "no-one took six hours to die on the cross" is fairly reckless.

[@almakaster6279]

I don't know what to believe anymore. I hear So many different stories about Jesus. And now Paul. I don't know. I love God so much, I want to be closer to him.

[@springtown24]

Alma. That is exactly what they want. God is not the author of confusion. You can have every confidence in his word both the Hebrew scriptures and the new testament. how do we know it is true, because it really works. When a preson is made aware of their sinfull state and then gets a look at Yeshua dying on a cross for their sins and they accept him as their own and personal saviour, that life is forever changed. A preacher recently said. " I did not see Jesus change water into wine but I have seen wine changed into a meal for a drunkards family. Jesus called the nation of Israel to repentance of sin and he still does so today, only he can change lives for the better, not the keeping of rabbinic rules and regulations but real salvation through him. God Bless you.

[@heavenbound1992]

Hey Alma, if you want some TRUTH, check out Chuck Missler, Walid Shoebat, JDFarag, Jonathan Kahn and Amir Tsafari. These are wonderful men of God. They are honest and great teachers especially Chuck Missler. Ask The Father of Abraham, Issac, & Jacob to give you wisdom and understanding. I'll pray for your protection against false doctrine and that He will give you the truth in your heart.

[@sammypst9098]

Believe in Jusus and read both Old and New Testments to in Faith.

[@screamtoasigh9984]

@@sammypst9098 there is only the TRUTH, the testmament known as the TORAH... and then there is the fake testament - aka pagan fan fiction.

[@screamtoasigh9984]

If you love G-d you will not practice idolatry. worshiping false gods is pagan idolatry. Eid Od - there is no other G-d but G-d.

[@IWannabeJew]

Josephus names a number of Jesuses, but none of them (except for the interpolation) correspond to the New Testament Jesus.

[@brianduzick9140]

lol thats a lie

[@MitzvosGolem1]

IWannabeJew No one has the original Aramaic Josephus. Church modified the text. No mention of JC in any historical records.

[@cedarridgefarmsincknightsp8635]

The name of Jesus is a made up name, but I refer to it so those that do not know the truth of his real name will understand. Iesus was his name in the Yeshua before 1611 when the Catholic Church changed it to the version we have now and if anyone was to actually research anything they would know that Iesus was not his name either. The Jewish language did not have a letter "J" until around the late 1700's and the real name of GOD is in the old testament of the KJV and not the New Revised KJV because it is trash. Jehovah is in the Old Testament of the Original 1611 KJV Holy Bible, but at the same time these scoundrels of the Catholic Church and other satin following people have done what they could to destroy what Christian's need to make it into heaven because they do not what you to go there. Jehovah said he went by many names and the Catholics and the fake Jew's don't want Christian too know the truth. GOD said we are too Obey His Laws and to follow what Jesus/Yeshua Christ said, how hard can that be?

[@johnprater5421]

​@@cedarridgefarmsincknightsp8635 What's in a name? After all, what you're speaking of is the differences between languages. "Jesus" is the most accurate name, for our westernized way of comprehending such a name as his. It began with Greek-written documents of a legendary Jewish messiah figure. From the beginning, the written accounts were bound to be confusing. The legend of the man was not written in Aramaic. Who we refer to as "Yeshua" is a later adopted concept to make Jesus appear more Jewish. But in no original gospel accounts is he ever referred to as Yeshua. This name would not make sense in its original Grecian-Roman context. "Iesous" with the "-ous" suffix tells the reader that the person was a man. "Yeshua" would sound like a woman to Greek readers, the people who first learned of the legend of a Jewish messiah as preserved in Greek-written documents. (This is not to say that through oral tradition a "Yeshua" may have not circulated among Galileans, Syrians, people of Asia Minor, and onward west to Rome; but those responsible for keeping written records wrote down the name for western eyes to comprehend.) I can't stress this enough. No known documents of the New Testament originated in Aramaic. Jesus was bound to be Grecian-Roman from the beginning of his recorded history. Now as for the letter "J," this is something that later developed, as languages do. As you claim, it's true, "J" does not work for Hebrew. So in other words, Jerusalem, Jacob, Judah, Joseph, etc. were never a part of Hebrew Scripture. But once again, for western eyes, certain Semitic names and places were translated and transliterated the best they could manage. As an example "Ya'acov" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue so easily for a westerner who can just as simply say "Jacob." Now moving along to 17th Century English translations and further onward--down to our current comprehension of the English language--how is one to read and rightly pronounce a name like "Iesous" or a more Latin version as "Iesus"? The first two letters are vowels, as we see it in modern times. But originally the "I" could have been a vowel or a consonant. This is how our "J" developed, so as to distinguish it from a mistaken vowel. I don't know what the 1611 edition of the King James calls God,--by His name--but I can tell you that "Jehovah" is not correct. Jehovah and Yahweh both are speculative names adopted from the original Hebrew source. In Scripture the name can only rightly be transliterated as "YHWH" (or "JHVH" if you prefer from a western perspective). This Hebrew source (from which the Tanakh, as well as in most Christian "Old Testament" translations) derives from the Masoretic Text. In Hebrew vowels are not written out; therefore a series of dots and slashs were invented, and put in place to help guide the reader; the symbols indicating the phonetic vowel sound to precede or follow after the pronunciation of a certain consonant. But in God's name, the vowel symbols are missing; the idea that His name is not to be uttered. By tradition "Adonai" is read in place of what is written (transliterated as "YHWH"). From "Adonai" we get our usual English translation of "LORD" in uppercase letters. Anyhow, it's easy to see how "Y(a)HW(e)H" or "J(e)H(o)V(a)H" became God's name if we speculate on where the vowels ought to be inserted. But honestly, we'll never know how to pronounce the Name correctly. Now what you said in regards to a Catholic version, this I'm lost on. The 1611 English translation belongs to the Church of England (under the reign of King James). This is a Protestant bible, and one that the Catholic Church never approved of. If anything, as time went on, Protestants withheld information from the public. The discarded books of the Old Testament, labelled as "Apocrypha," are still found in Catholic bibles. The only thing Catholics did was to translate Hebrew and Grecian texts into Latin; and from the Latin translation are all other Catholic bibles translated into the vernacular tongues.

[@valeriebriggs1058]

mitzvos Golem that's because his name is not Jesus His true name is YAHUSHUA

[@davesmith7528]

I enjoyed this talk very much. It's been a long time since I've seen anything as measured concerning the historicity of Jesus. I particularly enjoyed your cautionary debunking of the academic consensus on this. However we must remember that it is the historicity of NT Jesus specifically that is at issue here. Josephus alone informs us that there were many people who went by the name of Jesus. The realization that even the name 'Jesus Christ' is Anglicised Greek for something similar to 'Saviour Annointed' and as such could apply to many distinct individuals, simply adds to the confusion. So the idea that the very "fiction of the gospels" indicates a kernel of truth is a possibility, yet a probability only in the most generic sense. Of course another possibility is that Galilean, Samaritan or diaspora Gnostics either witnessing or anticipating the destruction of the 2nd Temple by the Romans ca. 70AD. simply seized the opportunity (it would have to be now or never) to write a scurrilous and fictitious account of how the Pharisees executed their own 'Messiah'. Personally I'm not that persuaded by the adoption v nativity argument since the latter could simply be an embellishment to sell the idea of 'OT prophecy fulfilled'. Why Nazareth; precisely because Nazareth was nothing and because they did not want the Messiah to hail from Judea. Who knows? We may never know whether or not NT Jesus ever existed but what is certain is he left no useful historical trace that could be construed as evidence thereof. On balance I think the mythecist (though I prefer the term fictionalist) view explains what we observe in the NT better.

[@davesmith7528]

@tate rosemary "There were a lot of people who were called Moses, too. So what?" So, one has to exercise extreme caution when dealing historically with popular generic names!

[@jeffreystern5886]

The interesting question is not the existence of Jesus.... it's how can Christianity not get a handle on who the real Jesus is. Christanity is splintered into upwards of 30000 different denominations, each with its own peculiar theology and different Jesus! The Mormon Jesus is not the same as the Episcopalian Jesus. The Seventh day Adventist Jesus is different than the Jehovah's witnesses one. The Christian Scientist Jesus is different than the Russian orthodox Jesus. Yet.... all the adherents of these different denominations claim that they have personal relationship with Jesus. Something doesn't add up.

[@user-kf2lp3mz9s]

He saying is strange that people never mention when Jesus died. People started coming from a grave and walking around just like when Daniel was in the Lions den and didn’t get eaten or was strong in a fiery furnace. it’s amazing things that happen all the time that don’t get documented

[@avremelkatz6006]

The question about Daniel not being eaten, who would have recorded it? The Babylonians! It's unlikely they'll record a miracle that happened to their enemy [ one of the main reasons why not much of the Hebrews are mentioned by Egypt]

[@tawfiqhridoy5387]

Rip jesus in the mind of fantasized christians🙂

[@carlanderson2468]

Prove to me Abraham and Moses were real legit people outside of the Bible 😒🍷

[@hendrikgrobler1342]

So by this valuation how do we know the Torah is corect ANd not also myth

[@fredmcelroy2839]

Thats a myth to.

[@fredmcelroy2839]

Moses never existed

[@PS-pk4hw]

If enough fools believe it it becomes "real" for a time. Remember Atlantis?

[@jacobklassen113]

@namik121 Yet God created the universe so what is it to him to do all those other things

[@Lestibournes]

Because it's based on a traditional passed down from parent to child of an entire nation of what that entire nation experienced together. It's not a few people writing books and convincing the masses. I don't see any point in history in which it could have been fabricated. To convince the nation by faking the mass revelation would require 20th century technologies, you'd need either aliens or time travel. To convince the masses of something everyone should know yet no one heard about and do so without evidence of the story being invented seems to approach being impossible. None of this applies to any religion I've ever heard of except Judaism.

[@jonathankuhn2180]

I see his point with the bugs bunny analogy, but it leads me to wonder, how would he respond if that analogy was used in reference to him and his jewish scriptures and the existence of God walking with Adam and Eve, or talking to Noah, etc?

[@theofulk5636]

Absolutely all of the statements made in the NT need to looked at in a "NOW" way, because all 'HIS' testimony is clearly stated as BEING THE SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. What it entails is both a correction of HIS "MISSION", which was not for Himself, but actually for the ONE, [anointed and led by HOLY SPIRIT] who would FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS, and become the NEW RESURRECTION, with gift of a NEW NAME, a good name. Christians, being generally ignorant of Tanach things, CAN BE JUDGED BY EVERYTHING IN THE NT, because it will be their measure, whether in works, Faith, Truth, Love or Obedience. Give account of your life, NOW !

[@jlopez4282]

I keep hearing these replies on Jesus prophesied the destruction of the Biet Mikdash (The temple) Let me just say this the Gospel of Matthew makes a elementary mistake by giving a genealogy of Joseph who is Joseph Jesus Mothers Husband is he the Father of Jesus no how do we know this the book says he's not so why would you waste a entire page on a man who is not the Father of your Leader simple the writer had a Limited knowledge of Judaism and the Torah he knew the Moshiach was the son of David however he did not know your tribal lineage passes through your Father not your mom or through adoption for example if My dad is from Benjamin and my mother a Levite I'm a Benjaminite. What's my point my point is if there is a flaw then it is not Kosher and in the first Chapter there are several Flaws. KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK RABBI TOVIA BARUCH HASHEM

[@johnmackinnon7321]

Who is Shiloh ? Genesis 49:10

[@colliric]

In the case of Adoption in the Second Temple Period when records were kept, YOU ARE WRONG! He was Torah correct of the line of King David BY BEING ADOPTED INTO IT...

[@julietrae8665]

I WOULD NOT TRUST A BOOK EITHER....I TRUSTED YESHUA AND PRAYED TO G_D, AND DO YOU WANT TO KNOW HOW I KNOW HE'S REAL? THE HOLY SPIRIT. YES. I DON'T NEED A BIBLE (ALTHOUGH IT'S GOOD NEWS) BUT WHEN THE HOLY SPIRIT COMES OVER YOU, EVEN AN OLD ATHEIST LIKE MY DAD AND A PUNK MOST OF MY LIFE, PERSON LIKE ME, KNOW..HE DOES CONVICT YOU OF SIN, AND PRAYERS DO GET ANSWERED, AND IT'S THE HEBREWS BIRTHRIGHT, BUT YOU WILL NOT OPEN YOUR EYES OF YOUR HEART. YESHU WOULD HAVE NEVER EVER, WANTED A VATICAN!!!! NEVER, WOULD HE HAVE WANTED SO MANY BOOKS THAT ADD AND TAKE AWAY, TO RATIONALISE HIS LORDSHIP...I BELIEVE HE'S THE EVER SO LONGSUFFERING, MY JESUS. BUT I'M PRETTY SURE ALSO HE'S GETTING TO WHERE HE'S GONNA SHOW YA., AND THE HEBREW IS SO LUCKY TO HAVE HIM AND TO RECEIVE HIM NOT, OVER HALF MISTAKES WRITTEN "BY MEN" BUT THE HOLY SPIRIT COMES UPON YOU, AND YOU JUST CHANGE..YOU SUDDENLY CAN READ, AND WEED OUT THE TARES OF MENS MISTAKES, OH HOW WONDERFUL HE IS..I PRAY AND DREAM THAT YOU'LL HAVE WHAT I HAVE. REAL CHRISTIANS THAT ARE BORN OF THE SPIRIT KNOW! THE RELIGION, IS THE ABOMINATION..NOPE. YESHU'S RED LETTERS IS ALL I NEED, BUT THE HOLY SPIRIT FILLS IN OTHER GAPS INTO MY LIFE AND SCRATCHES OUT THE MISTAKES..ALL I SEE IS CALVARY AND SOON HE'LL BE BRINGING IN THE CAVALRY! HALLELUJAH! SELAH JESUS HOLY..HOLY..HOLY!!!!!!!

[@valeriebriggs1058]

Jimmy Kelley You are right in all you say Jimmy except that His name Is YAHUSHUA not Jesus. I love you.

[@julietrae8665]

@@valeriebriggs1058 Love you!

[@lucharward]

Rabbi I love u and what u do in general. but this one is risky - with your method it would be even easier to prove that the stories of the old testament did not exist, that they were Bugs Bunny stories.

[@swissapologetics]

*The Gospel in the Psalms* *You are my Son; today I have begotten you.* (2,7) *Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor.* (8,5) *All who hate me whisper together about me; they imagine the worst for me.* (41,7) *Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me.* (41,9) *Malicious witnesses rise up; they ask me of things that I do not know* (35,11) *they have pierced my hands and feet* (22,16) *He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken.* (34,20) *they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.* (22,18) *My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?* (22,2) *They gave me poison for food, and for my thirst they gave me sour wine to drink.* (69,21) *My enemies say of me in malice, “When will he die, and his name perish?”* (41,5) *They say, “A deadly thing is poured out on him; he will not rise again from where he lies.”* (41,8) *But you, O Lord, be gracious to me, and raise me up, that I may repay them!* (41,10) *Add to them punishment upon punishment; may they have no acquittal from you.* (69,27) *Let them be blotted out of the book of the living; let them not be enrolled among the righteous.* (69,28) *For they persecute him whom you have struck down, and they recount the pain of those you have wounded.* (69,26) *The Lord redeems the life of his servants; none of those who take refuge in him will be condemned.* (34,22) *Blessed is the man against whom the Lord counts no iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no deceit.* (32,2) *Therefore let everyone who is godly offer prayer to you at a time when you may be found; surely in the rush of great waters, they shall not reach him.* (32,6)

[@edwardmiessner6502]

@@swissapologetics the fact that you have to extract the lines here and there as proof texts is clear evidence that there was no prophecy for a dying and rising Messiah, as if he were a Greek god. Besides, for the prophecy to be fulfilled, Jesus was supposed to have said when they were nailing him to the cross (actually a stick figure of Priapus), "Father, forgive them NOT, for they know EXACTLY what they're doing!!!", and not the line we actually had in Luke.

[@swissapologetics]

@@edwardmiessner6502 How is this clear evidence that there was no prophecy about a dying and rising Messiah?

[@arlosmith2784]

Actually I think the Islamic narrative that there WAS a Jesus - though not one who rose from the dead or performed miracles - has reinforced popular belief there was a historical Jesus. As missionary religions that assert the historicity of Jesus, both Islam and Christianity have made belief such historicity widespread worldwide

[@red2thebone]

I wish my mom would listen to you! This was absolutely amazing! She's not talking to me over my decision to follow Jewish Orthodox Judaism beliefs and become a Noahide! It saddens me deeply that she refuses to hear the truth about Christianity lies! We were really close! When i first started listening to you my heart just knew mind body and soul spirit its to much familiar this is home for me thats the only way i can explain it! Bless you rabbi tovia! 🥹😢

[@benlassu1880]

You know it's a pretty interesting vantage point, you actually hit on something that needs be touched on over and over again by many other Rabbis

[@joshportie]

All rabbis should be dishonest?

[@robertadams9866]

For those who want direction on this issue look up Ptolomy Soter. Look up Serapis. These did historically exist. The worshipers of this Serapis image were called Bishops of Christ and Christians way before a Jesus which derived from Zeus. Meaning the son of Zeus or the son of God. Serapis was known as the sun God. Constantine had to intervene because the division would lessen the power of the Roman Catholic Church. These people exist. They're on coins. You ever wonder why Jesus was not put on a coin. And how come nobody else wrote about such a great person at that time?. I'm sure it would have been the story to cover.

[@johnmackinnon7321]

8 historians document the Man Y'shua (nick name Jesus) did exist ! "New Evidence that Demands a Verdict" by Josh Mc Dowell.

[@pdxnikki1]

Praying for God to give you a fuller revelation of who He is, Rabbi Singer. May you meet your Messiah soon.

[@lizmariposa1]

I am an atheist, and have your same conclusion as you as to the historicity of Jesus... but I will only add that Josephus didn't just have that one interpolated reference; people often mention another reference which they see as genuine, mostly because it is just referencing his brother, and doesn't really give importance to Jesus, other than to say James was the brother of 'the so called Christ.' While I certainly think one needs to be more than just a historian to study these matters with the degree of depth that they deserve -- such as the education Prof. Bart Ehrman has -- I do feel that he is perhaps, emotionally tied to he romanticism of a Jesus character... and has called him 'the most influential person in history,' etc. I find this to be obnoxious, personally... The culture of Christianity, perhaps -- but the Biblical Jesus... I really find no persuasive argument that much of the persona portrayed in the book, was based on fact. Just a myth built around some itinerant doomsday preacher persona.

[@Truthseeker1515]

Saul of Tarsus brought this ''itinerant (and delusional) doomsday preacher" to light....As to believe in the Jewish scriptures, it's complete and utter nonsense, supernatural trash. Human beings are free at birth with the capacity to reason only to be polluted by this religious hogwash. Like a malevolent virus. Shocking really. Atheist comrade, I salute you.

[@Daniel24445]

This is what Polish Jew Helen P. Blatvasky occultist and organizer of British "New Age Movement" had to say in her book "Isis Unveiled". "....It is the third hour of the day, the time when the veil of the temple was rent asunder, when darkness and consternation were spread over the earth when the light was darkened when the implements of masonry were broken-when the flaming star disappeared-when the cubic stone was broken, when the word was lost...." Helen P. Blatvasky occult New Age organizer/author "Isis Unveiled" Vol. 2 p. 348. In fact all the old books of British occult/Kabbalah authors mention Jesus. In fact where is their God? If their god is so powerful why must they siphon America's posterity? Kabbalah six pointed star is a tailsman.

[@edwardmiessner6502]

I agree with you and the Rabbi. The most influential figure in history is not Jesus but rather Constantine, who invented Christianity as we know it in 325 ce, and a very close second is Saul/Paul of Tarsus, who invented the original version.

[@loualcaraz6497]

I wonder if I asked the good rabbi the same question about Moses, Abraham, Noah, Jacob, etc. If there is any proof of their existence other than the Torah? Does he believe he wasted his life studying Caspar the ghost? There's a huge difference between history and religion. History in most instances needs to be verified or at least deduced in order to be believed. Religion is a matter of faith and requires no proof in order to be believed.

[@RailRiderTopFuel]

Unfortunately for you if Moses doesn't exist then it is the 1st thread pulled that unravels the entire Bible. You lose Jesus too! There are many who believe there was no Moses or Exodus. Very little historical evidence showing large groups of people living in the desert all those years. Anyway no need to look into it because a person who needs no evidence for their belief doesn't really need archeological proof or even a Bible then! Lol

[@loualcaraz6497]

@@RailRiderTopFuel it’s not unfortunate for me because I don’t believe in religion, but I’m also careful not to offend or belittle anyone for his/her beliefs. I just don’t think a religious person of any faith should be doing that.

[@javigarcia9237]

Jesus Did not. EXIST🤣🤣🤣🤣But Moses Existed acording to them not only moses the 2 sons of Adam, they have proff that those people existed but Jesus not🤣🤣🤣im laghuing.

[@javigarcia9237]

This Rabi is Funny 🤣🤣

[@ml1712]

Exactly!👍

[@edwinchanx]

A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah." Jesus then left them and went away. matthew 16:4 Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” john 20:29

[@brotherj1405]

Amen! Deutronomy 32:21. Can we get this break down Tovia ? You and you counter parts seem to skim right past this text. But this should explain why the NT was written in Greek and why you all need Jesus Christ

[@rabiahfrank2494]

"As Jonah was so shall the Son of Man be" Matthew 12:40 Was Jonah alive or dead when he was cast into the belly of the whale?

[@edwinchanx]

@@rabiahfrank2494 These are clues which somewhat bring my understanding that Jonah was dead. 1.From deep in the realm of the dead I called for help, jonah 2:2 Realm of the dead could mean that his spirit already left his body. Which mean he is clinically dead. To the roots of the mountains I sank down; the earth beneath barred me in forever. But you, Lord my God, brought my life up from the pit. Jonah 2:5 2.Roots of the mountain roots that extend downward into the mantle beneath a mountain range, and that the roots are, in general, about 5.6 times deeper than the height of the range. To qualify as mountain, it has to be at least 300 meter above sea level. No human can survive 1500 meter below sea level. The earth beneath barred me forever. That could mean his spirit is stuck in the earth beneath could not get out. 3.Brough my life up from the pit. Pit means grave, his life was brough up from the grave. 4. Jesus let out a loud cry and breathed his last. Mark 15:37 Jesus breathed his last meaning he is dead. 5. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Matthew 12:40). I believe what Jesus was trying to say to the Pharisee is that these pricks who think they are overly smartass who keep questioning and trying to find fault in Jesus, they believe the Torah/old testament. Jonah is one of the prophet in the Torah. It does not matter if Jonah is dead or half dead. What Jesus was saying is that Jonah in 3 days 3 night in belly of fish, Jesus will be 3 days 3 night in the heart of the earth. Now that is 10 trillion degree, I dont think Jesus is clinically alive, I believe it is his spirit at the heart of the earth which is some would believe is the lake of fire/hell.

[@RonBozich]

@@edwinchanx I agree with you about Jonah being dead. I like how 1 Pet 3:18 clarifies Jesus' death in body and being made alive in spirit. This is going further, but I believe that the Jonah story and Christ's death gives us a glimpse at a choice that can be made about what a person believes in the 3 days after death. Shalom!

[@isabelhertz8807]

Interesting about Hashem is he doesn’t need or rely on testimony of men to prove he is. Yet he is!

[@glennshrom5801]

What about Daniel's prophecy with the number of days? Michael Heiser says that the Essenes calendar would have given a particular date for Jesus' birth that lines up very nicely. Isn't the issue of Daniel's number of days a main reason people were expecting the Messiah to be born around that time ... not a day later?

[@NomadOutOfAfrica]

I love your views Tovia and the compassionate way you address Christian fallacies and myths but what about the Jewish ones😅

[@ricardopenamcknight6407]

I've mentioned this on another one of your videos but since you mentioned here the idea that there probably was a real Jesus behind the stories that the authors force-fit to make a messiah figure, I can't help but think it would make perfect sense if Jesus was an advanced Jewish mystic. Not much later in history of course a kabbalist would be briefly held up as a possible messiah before he ended up caving and converting to Islam. As I mentioned in a previous video if a Jewish mystic did have access to the level of yechidah they could say many of the things Jesus supposedly said and arguably would have even been able to perform miracles and surely to prophesy as well. It is something that would even comport with the adoptionist narrative. If one is bound so deeply to God that they attain the oneness with God at the level of Yechidah then they could quite justifiably proclaim that "I and the father are one". Such a person could reasonably claim about himself things that would, on the surface, sound blasphemous to the Jewish people and anti-empire to the Romans. Of course, as you've pointed out many times before Rabbi Singer, all Jews are called Sons of God. A big part of why, at least according to my understanding of the Zohar and the claims made by the Ari and others, is that Jewish souls at least are tied to these root souls and are (if I'm understanding correctly) tied to God himself in a way that supposedly non-jewish souls are not. Granted it strikes me as a bit racist to insist that all gentiles only have nefesh or animal souls and will decay with the rest of the animals... but I digress. Even if Jesus did not actually perform any miracles at all I think this version of events would explain a lot, especially if paired with the Notovitch accounts but let's even put that aside for now. Let's say we have this spiritual and mystical prodigy who becomes a tzaddik very young and even impresses John the Baptist and we have the beginning of the adoptionist narrative when Jesus reaches access to the very high level parts of the soul. He goes out to minister and people hear him say things that he's only saying because his high level of mystical attainment and union with God. Some get really excited thinking he's going to be the messiah and some get really offended thinking what he's saying is blasphemous and those who think he's blaspheming present to the Roman Governor that he's essentially fomenting rebellion against the empire because of the things he's saying and the following that he's gathering and so he's crucified, and because the people of that time think that the end is nigh they initially believe that he's got to be the messiah and that's how the story is presented to the public. Of course I lean in the more mystical direction so I'm not afraid to throw some miracles back into the mix. It's conceivable with a sufficiently high level mystical union with God that he did perform at least some of the miracles ascribed to him and even that several people did see him alive from the grave after his crucifixion. Indeed, this would have been very significant to his followers to get out the message so that more people could follow Jesus' example especially inasmuch as it demonstrates that those faithful to God's teachings really are beyond the reach of death. Of course it would only make sense that a growing movement such as that would have been politicized at the time because political tensions were high and it was right around the time where the Jews were getting ready to wage a disastrous rebellion. It would have, perhaps, been especially significant if he, like most good prophets, had warned the people that they were about to get disastrously crushed by the Roman empire and the temple destroyed just as prophets had previously warned about all the other times the Jewish people were going to get conquered and especially if the temple would be destroyed.

[@bluwng]

@Foolish Mortal you are nuts, that guy wrote an epic. You must have lots of free time. Use Tovia logic, which isn’t his, he is using a historians technique, everyone and every empire in the Old Testament can not be proven, there are zero records of the Exodus from Egypt. Humans always look for confirmation bias and get a big erection when they find it. No historical character from any religion can be proven.

[@dougwebster1813]

And you have no bias!

[@MA-oe1pu]

One who is seeking the absolute truth, has a bias when scriptures are put before him that contradict themselves. Others, have a bias that they must prove their story line at all costs...even to mistranslate in order to avoid the contradictions their stories create.

[@daspecialist1220]

Actually it seems like his bias is tenak (old testament)

[@rightousliving]

I’m excited that someone points out the discrepancies between the two gospels of Matthew and Luke. I tried that for years with my Christian brothers but it always ends on deaf ears. They always seem to think that it magically resolves itself by ignoring it. I have a lot of issues with the New Testament. I believe it’s helpful but I would not put it at the level of the Tenach, more at the level of books like Tobit. Through the NT we learn about Jesus but we need to be careful and realise that they were compiled under the auspices of the Roman Emperors who although they claimed to be Christians in reality worshipped the old Roman, Egyptian and Greek deities and incorporated many of these ideas into Christianity. It would be much more interesting to find out what early Christians really believed.

[@theserpentshallwin]

What do you think of the book, "Caesars Messiah" by Joseph Atwill? I think it will relate to this topic. As I understand it, Nazareth didn't exist in 1A.D?

[@edwardmiessner6502]

Whether Nazareth existed in 1 AD is debatable but if it did, it was either a single family farm or a small hamlet. It was certainly not a city complete with its own synagogue, unlike say Capernaum or Sepphoris.

[@user-lj9zq4dr5t]

Its a joke, 99,9% of theological historians would laugh at it.

[@paulfell4962]

Nazareth did exist at the time. If you own "Caesers Messiah" do yourself a favour & throw it in the bin. This book isn't history, it's a daft conspiracy theory.

[@EitsChaimIndonesia2015]

2000 views within 24 hours.

[@anjinghitam8141]

If there is no Tanakh so it will be no new testament. And i think all you guys here should learn start from the core not backwards. Lets say Moses,Jesus etc didn't exist why bother watching this channel Lol

[@01DB]

In your commentary it's clear that the variations of this character's birth is not consistent, this further strengthens my belief that christianity is a roman inspired idea to absorb the jews into their messianic narrative, which failed...

[@user-rr2eo7gb7z]

Do not forget Tovia is just a Rabbi...and sees things his/jewish their way...very extreme view but only if it benefits them, one way or the other !!! Jews will always be ...jews ...!!!!!!

[@01DB]

@@user-rr2eo7gb7z your right he sees things his way as do you, Christianity since it's Romano inception has always hated Jews, there is nothing more concise than blaming a whole culture than the new testes stating that it was the Jews who killed their Lord and saviour, clearly an antisemitic trope so blatant its laughable, yet two thousand years later people with poor educations or indoctrinated blindly would still believe such hatred, which explains why Jews have been treated the way they have and still do to this day, the two offshoots of Judaism are the worst ideas for religions and anyone dumb enough to accept their lies as truth need to really get educated...

[@romanmontero3517]

I wonder if the Rabbi has read what Paul Maier has written about the testemonium flavianum, also the fact that later in Jusephus Anitquities it mentions James the brother of Jesus the "one called" Christ, obviously NOT a christian interpolation, and obviously assuming that Jesus had been mentioned before. He says everyone agrees the TF is an interpolation, no most everyone agrees that at least part of it is, an interpolation, but a lot of scholars believe that there part of the TF is origional, and they have very good arguments for believing that, including the fact that his brother is mentioned later with the assumption the reader would have known who Jesus the one called Christ is. As far as Jesus not being mentioned outside Christian literature (other than Josephus) until about 130, (also if you ignore other ones that wrote about him in the first century such as Tacitus), What Jewish leader was written about outside of Jewish literature within the 100 years of their living? I mean imagine if he applied the same criteria to Jewish figures, big or small, it's completely rediculous, even all the figures WITHIN Josephus. Also just because a source is Christian doesn't mean the historian throws it out as valuable, or historical. There's a reason NT scholars almost unanmously think the mythesist aurgument is nonsense, and not because their lives would be a waste, they wouldn't, they would stil be studying the sources of the text, the sources of the traditions, infact they'd have a whole lot more work to do, but because it's a rediculous theory that requires one to believe all sorts of other unsubstanciated and uncredible things and also requires a completely diferent historical standard than one used for anyhing else in ancient history.

[@jackloganbill605]

Greatly appreciate your podcasts/talks/lessons, thank you!

[@jackloganbill605]

@Brayan Bernal Existed, Yes! Supernatural literal offspring of God, not so much. But what do I know?

[@jackloganbill605]

@Brayan Bernal yes

[@jackloganbill605]

@Brayan Bernal none, only the old testament bible, and the Quran ....

[@jackloganbill605]

@Brayan Bernal Bible, Quran, Jewish and Middle Eastern tradition

[@carmelomizzi7679]

Rabbi Tovia ... did you ever had the time to study the new testament in the light of the old testament to really find what the truth is ... remember that you and your students depend very much on that truth for your salvation ... Jesus is the truth ... He is your savior ... with out Him you cannot be saved ... do not stop on the old testimony ... that's only half road there ...

[@joelweiner4798]

Carmelo...what is Truth? Your answer? Are you 100% sure? really and why? PROVE IT!!!

[@sammypst9098]

God Bless You

[@edwardmiessner6502]

Carmelo, bless your heart. Rabbi Singer HAS studied the NT in light of the *ORIGINAL* OT---the Tanakh (read Luke 24, the meeting with the 2 disciples on Emmaus Road), and found the NT to be false, mainly because it mangles scripture. The Tanakh is arranged by the Torah (the law), the Neviim (the prophets), and the Kethuvim (the psalms and other writings). Compare with our OT: the psalms and other writings come before the prophets! Worse the NT uses a GREEK translation which is a Christian expansion and corruption of the Septuagint. I'm sorry but the truth hurts.

[@davidfrehler1299]

What is going on with the CC?

[@phillipgoble1793]

How do you explain the writing of Paul, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John.

[@unicyclist97]

Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John are all anonymous fictions, and the other 3 are ripping off Mark. Mark is complete fiction. Paul's epistles support mythicism. He repeatedly swears blind that nobody ever met Jesus except in visions and with secret messages on scripture. Paul was a mythicist.

[@gaiusoctavius5935]

,@@unicyclist97 You conveniently fail to mention that after his conversion three years earlier Paul met with James and Peter and stayed with them for 15 days.

[@jackloganbill605]

read the first verses of Luke 1. In that time many people were writing and sharing stories and who knows how much was seen, made up, embellished...so Luke, not an apostle, disciple, or eyewitness, collected what he heard and wrote it down. What chance did he have of getting it right?

[@TheHookahSmokingCaterpillar]

Paul smoked some bad shit on the road to Damascus and kept getting flashbacks for years to come. Mark wrote an extended allogory not based on any historic events. Matthew tried to put Mark's story into history and make it more acceptable to Jews, Luke did the same but for gentiles. John wanted a superhero, so jazzed up the story a bit. Simple really.

[@MrArdytube]

It would seem that Jesus had a brother (James) who was important in the Jerusalem church,. I am not a Christian, but generally trust the Judgement of Bart Ehrman... who has significant expertise, and who also has no motive to defend the religion.

[@juditrotter5176]

I really like to read and watch Bart’s videos. It’s interesting to note that he started education at the Moody evangelical college, then went to an Ivy League school for his Divinity degree and eventually came to be the head of Religious Studies at UNC. Somewhere in that process he became an agnostic. A big jump from evangelical fundamentalist thinking. Some great videos about his journey.

[@MrArdytube]

@@juditrotter5176 Yes, I think that Ehrman’s evangelical background, combined his extraordinary academic research establishes his unique position of credibility. In case you are interested... there 8s a KZbin Chanel called “Myth vision” which is putting out an extraordinary range of interviews Returning to the topic... IMO it is clear that the church fathers included a a wide range of mythological material which they used to enhance the competitiveness of their evangelism. That said, it is a huge leap to say that the expedient inclusion of these expropriated myths proves the absence of some real Jesus in the beginning. Frankly, we know that throughout history there have been an ongoing succession of such itinerant charismatic cult leaders .... so it would be more extraordinary if there were not some initiating reality

[@edwardmiessner6502]

His wife is still a believing Christian so he has a motive

[@Wilkins_Micawber]

This explanation with disagreements in the New Testament only goes to confirm that the people who wrote those books were not contemporary witnesses to Christ and the books where written from verbal tradition. The fact that the books disagree is not evidence of the positive. Neither book can be trusted to stand on its own to support the story of Christ.

[@davesmith7528]

A more succinct explanation, perhaps, to the *Nazareth* reference is that the NT habitually fictionalises clumsy attempts to "fulfil" what the authors presumed to be prophesies in the Septuagint:- Judges[13:5] For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a *Nazarite* unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines. Matthew[1:21] And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Judges[13:7] But he said unto me, Behold, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and now drink no wine nor strong drink, neither eat any unclean thing: for the child shall be a *Nazarite* to God from the womb to the day of his death. Luke[1:31] And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.

[@Jamie-Russell-CME]

Why do you guys teach that man has a soul when your own scripture teaches man is a soul?

[@janfeelders8411]

There is no evidence for Moses excist or splitting the sea. Or the exodus from Egypt.

[@haroldcrenshaw5630]

But i witnessed it in that movie

[@mrenigma1564]

no man there is check jabal al lawz the true mount sinai goo see it in your google or watch a video the evidence is there

[@MitzvosGolem1]

Dr Bart Ehrman exposes alot of issues with New Testament.

[@melissamac2491]

Isaiah 43 19?

[@guitarman5336]

hey tovia, you can say anything, everything you want but.......my FAITH, our FAITH TO OUR SAVIOR LORD JESUS CANNOT BE BROKEN.....that is why they, we call it FAITH !!!! SHALOM tovia !!!!!

[@mikepeterson4248]

Micah 5:2

[@memolopez495]

Isaiah 43:25 So let’s get this clear: (it’s for My own sake that I save you). God said Not for the sake of my son! Isaiah 44:24 I am the Eternal, Creator of all there is and will be. (I alone stretched out the heavens and spread out the blue earth). He didn't said I and my son! Isaiah 46:5 Does anyone compare to Me? Can you find any likeness? Who or what might be My equal or even close to Me? Jesus said that he was like God! Isaiah 46:9 Remember the old days. For I am God; there is no other. I am God; there are no other gods like Me.

[@emenanjonwadiei]

Wow! Rabbi, you make an excellent point!

[@alexsolow3188]

Bless you Tovia . One question - What is the God spark that you speak about ,?

[@josephocarez2925]

Rabbi, how to contact you? I have a lot of question about the Torah.

[@SigiRobert]

The torah is eternal.

[@user-wd7ex4gr6b]

Always check the links under the video. I tried to tell you what it was, but my reply was deleted!

[@nrnash83]

There is even less historical “evidence” for biblical figures like Elijah, Moses, and especially Abraham. Does that mean they never existed because external written works don’t exist supporting their existence or the facts surrounding their accomplishments? I think that is a foolish position to take knowing there is even less to support the preceding biblical figures.

[@factorychip]

I'm assuming you didn't finish the video to actually see what position he took. If you're going to call someone foolish, you should at least listen to what he has to say first.

[@nrnash83]

Clearly you did not watch the video either. If you had, then you would’ve noticed that he went to great length to only express how there was a probability that Jesus existed, but never actually stated out right that he did exist. Once again, there’s far more reason to believe that Jesus existed and was the person written about specifically in the Scriptures, as opposed to merely being one among many preachers as rabbi Tovia stated, who would adequately fit within a loose idea of the “Jesus figure”. There is more reason to believe in Jesus’ existence with absolute certainty than even Moses himself or any other biblical person. To state otherwise by attributing a mere probability of likelihood is idiotic. That’s like saying there is a 50% chance Moses was real. What external written sources are there showing Moses was a real figure outside of the scriptures? None. Therefore, both individuals encounter a similar problem, but I believe Moses was real just the same as Jesus.

[@jamabarker4051]

Love hearing the truth! Thank you! 💎

[@jamabarker4051]

@Brayan Bernal idk anything for sure

[@jamabarker4051]

@@fredgillespie5855 well, for 1. The letter J isn't even 500 years old, yet (research it). Therefore, the name Jesus didn't exist 2000 years ago. 2. The Council of Nicea made a new Savior and named him Jesus. There is a lot more besides this. You'll have to do your own research.

[@jamabarker4051]

@@fredgillespie5855 obviously, you haven't done your research. The letter J isn't even 500 years old. Research the letter J. Read and research the council of Nicea. This council created Jesus. I used to believe every word, but as I read, I realized all I was taught was not true. But, you do you, and I'm definitely going to do me. YA (GOD) HU (IS) SHUAH (SAVIOR) YAHUSHUAH is the same meaning as JOSHUA ...Jesus is Greek and translated means God (Je) Zeus (sus). ❤ enjoy your Saturday ~

[@jamabarker4051]

@@fredgillespie5855 why throw insults? Ebay...geez Louise

[@mattday6910]

I totally agree on the bias aspect. Some of the most adamant about an “existence” are indeed those agnostic professors. Throw this in as well. They would be unemployed if there were no actual Jesus (and/or if it weren’t at least debatable)... My VERY strong opin.. there was no Jesus. I disagree with Rabbi Singer on the fiction as legitimacy to an existence.... So, there was a tooth fairy as well, correct?. The Tooth Fairy was a person, and for god knows what reason, someone wanted to waste time, take a person from the past, and make them a fictional character. What?!?!? We’ll give this actual person wings, pixie dust, and a wad of $1 bills.... What is the point of wasting so much time on taking a PEASANT (from what we read) from the past, and then over 100+ yrs later, making him a character (whose characteristics/attributes meet that of 100% fiction)?.. and like Yoda, only spoke in parables. If you are to believe that a Jesus existed, you need to rush to a church and repent. If a Jesus existed, all of those things actually happened. What I’ve written above is indeed the case if a Jesus existed. They took some peasant and for god knows what reason made him into the tooth fairy 100+:yrs later.... again, there was no Jesus. That, or those things occurred & ya need to repent ASAP. That’s the ONLY thing that provides ANY RHYME OR REASON to an existence. The next time you say something is “nonsense.” It might not be, actually. Read the paragraph above. Compare it to what you see above. If it matches the above you’ll be at complete nonsense. The above paragraph is a good measuring-stick for nonsense. What you think is nonsense, might actually make some sense if you’re to compare it to the paragraph above.

[@davidd7940]

Your comment regarding NT scholars being upset because they've dedicated their careers is similar to other fields, including the hard sciences. In geology there's the conflict between uniformitarianism and catastrophism. In cosmology, it's between the standard model of gravity and the electric universe. In medicine it's between the germ theory and the terrain theory. And then there's the whole mess about global warming climate change CO2 (all false in my opinion). It's human nature to want to maintain one's personal position of power or respect.... and forget about truth.

[@joseseghiri9]

Rabí, this is an extraodinary Excellent presentation to me. May many people have eyes to see, and the power of the Will to understand the Truth of The Torah, because when this happens, that is a TRUE Miracle from the Eternal, is not easy nor so simple to put the knife of the Torah into the heart and kneel down sorrounded to the G*d of Israel, the G*d if the Jewish People.

[@EliezerPennywhistler]

+Jose Seghiri What is G*d supposed to mean?

[@joseseghiri9]

Bow to the Torah Oral and written and follow the mizvots +Eliezer Pennywhistler

[@joseseghiri9]

+Eliezer Pennywhistler And may ask you Eliezer what is G*d supposed to mean to you too?

[@EliezerPennywhistler]

+Jose Seghiri Dunno. A bizarre and pointless misspelling? ESL fail?

[@joseseghiri9]

Eliezer Pennywhistler Mr Pennywhistler, you are a getleman and a Scholar, I am very sorry for my illiteracy, but let me tell you one thing with my due respect to you Sir, I am 66 years old, and 30 years under the unmercy boots of Fascism, I did what I could to improve myself in education and I think I am not able to argue with you, but I can distinguish well cynicism from a lack of education and gentlemanliness.

[@tanicajackson5132]

Thank You, Rabbi Tovia !!!! Peace and Love, My Brother !!! 🙏🙏

[@nomorewar4189]

Tanica Jackson - he’s not even a rabbi.

[@janishart5128]

@@nomorewar4189: And upon WHAT do you base THAT fake news??!! Rabbi Singer has been an ORDAINED ORTHODOX RABBI, for many, many decades!!

[@ronnieevangelista4123]

Jesus called the likes of this rabbi as HYPOCRITES! In fact, Jesus called them BROOD OF VIPERS AND HYPOCRITES!

[@janishart5128]

​@@ronnieevangelista4123: Actually, "VIPERS" and "HYPOCRITES" are self-professed, self-righteous people, filled with 'Christian love', who only SAY they "LOVE" the Jews, and then justify their hatred, by using their false, pagan, anti-God, anti-Jewish, hate-filled, replacement theology 'New Testament' (that did NOT come from God), to call highly learned rabbis, who have been studying God's original, ETERNAL (i.e. STILL in effect today!) Torah for thousands of years, all kinds of dirty, hate-filled names! Christianity, that has arrogantly, brazenly and blasphemously done violence to God's original, ETERNAL Hebrew scriptures that He gave to Moses on Mt. Sinai, sound more like the "VIPERS" and "HYPOCRITES" you spoke of!! The ONLY scriptures God ever gave to mankind, is His Torah that He gave to Moses on Mt. Sinai. He told us the Torah is ETERNAL (i.e. STILL in effect today!) and that we are NOT to follow ANY OTHER TEACHING than what is in His Torah. If you know of a scripture where God told us to expect a SECOND set of scriptures (i.e. the false, pagan, man-made "NT"), AFTER Mt. Sinai, (i.e. God's ETERNAL Hebrew Torah) please, by all means produce it! We would be more than interested to see that scripture. And PLEASE don't quote Jer. 31, which has absolutely nothing to do with a new set of scriptures! Also God ABHORS human sacrifice, so He absolutely DID NOT have "Jesus" murdered to 'pay for people's sins' - this just DID NOT happen and is a HUGE insult to God. PLEASE do some honest research on how your false, pagan, man-made religion started, and you WILL discover that it did NOT come from God, Creator of the universe.

[@nomorewar4189]

Janis - and Abraham was born in Cush which today is Iraq -

[@johnspartan98]

I can give the same argument right back at Singer: Don't believe those who doubt the historical Jesus because the reason they doubt is because their faith in Judaism, humanism, buddhism, Hinduism, Islamism, atheism, or whatever else they believe in, hangs on their disbelief in the Gospel accounts and the epistles. Where does that get us? The Historical evidence for Jesus is overwhelming. I notice Rabbi Singer did not mention the Jewish Historian Josephus who lived between 37 and 100 AD and wrote about Jesus. There is also evidence that Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew first, within five years of Jesus' crucifixion, and then shortly after that he wrote Matthew in Greek due to a great demand from the churches. The authors of the book 'Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus', Bivin and Blizzard , throughout their book, present evidence to support the above position. Statistics are quoted to show that over 90% of the Bible, including Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, was written in Hebrew, with about 1% in Aramaic, and the rest in Greek. If Bivin and Blizzard are right, there needs to be a change in thinking about the origin of the synoptic gospels and the resultant translations. Bivin and Blizzard also quote from Eusebius in 'Ecclesiastical History', giving evidence that it was known in his day that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew. Eusebius himself had quoted other writers, Papias (Book III, Chapter 39, page 127), Irenæus (Book V, Chapter 8, page 187), Origen (Book VI, Chapter 25, page 245), and Eusebius himself (Book III, Chapter 24, page 108). The editor of 'Ecclesiastical History' adds the following footnote to the comment of Papias: *_"The author here, doubtless, means Syro-Chaldaic, which is sometimes in Scripture, and by other writers, called Hebrew."_* Papias adds that it had to be translated, which suggests that it was not in the language of the church. Origen, mentions that Matthew was written in Hebrew. The compilers of The Bible Almanac mention that Matthew wrote first in Syriac, Syro-Chaldaic, Aramaic, or Hebrew and that he may have rewritten later in Greek for wider use. The current gospel, in the oldest Greek language texts, has been written by someone other than Matthew. Evidence demonstrates the RCC altered Matthew 28:19 to include the trinitarian formula of baptism. Historical evidence in the form of written materials shows Matthew's Hebrew manuscript was in the possession of Jerome, and prior to that it was in the care of Eusebius, then in the care of Pamphilus, and then preserved in the library at Caesarea. It was either destroyed by trinitarians or it still exists and is locked away in the Vatican. Eusebius quoted Matthew 28:19 from the Hebrew manuscript more than 18 times in his writings.

[@brotherj1405]

Here is the key to Tovias " magical knowledge " = he knows that a large large majority of proclaiming Christians do not study Torah or alone barely the NT. However ... He still has to deal with Deuteronomy 32:21 .. Why don't you address this one for the class Tovia ? If any baby Christians are watching this . Please run away until you have at least 10 years of faith grounded in Christ .

[@marilynsamaniego4652]

Ive had more than 20 years and my faith alone couldn’t save me . James the brother of Jesus said so..I am glad I have learned some correct readings and informed how Torah was twisted by Paul and later early church fathers.

[@clay2424]

You basically just said.... "Come back when you're sufficiently brain washed". Since Tovia never responded I'll address this for the "class". Deutoronomy 32:21 "They [Israel, Jacob] made me jealous by what is no god and angered me with their worthless idols. I will make them envious by those who are not a people; I will make them angry by a nation that has no understanding". Can you explain what you mean when you quote this? It has absolutely no connection to any comment you made or this video whatsoever? What is there in Deuteronomy 32:21 that anyone has to deal with? It is yet again another terrible Christian interpretation of a text that has nothing to do with Jesus at all... ridiculous anyone even has to bring this up. Specifically mentioned in Chapter 32 is Israel (Jacob) and God's condemnation of idol worship which is common place in the Old Testament. Theres nothing else to look for.

[@patriciatreslove4449]

Praise G-d for HIS People ISRAEL

[@robertusvanhattem1307]

Why do you abbreviate? "God" is not a name but a title.

[@jcflash2381]

TO BE FAIR THIS IS MY PROOF THAT THIS RABBI IS A LIAR... In Israel Look at the Dome temple of Muslim it's beautiful..... look at this Judaism temple? actually there is no temple but a piece of rubble rocks and a piece of wall a thing of the past? Why it is written in John2 20-22.. this is my Prrof that Jesus is true the messiah....

[@mitchellpolstein3043]

Hay-Souse does exist.I knew has younger brother Raul when I was growing up in New Jork.

[@screamtoasigh9984]

He mowed my lawn a few years ago as well. Never met the brother though.

[@acersmazal3254]

The question is Jesus words changed the world! Here in the Mt. Province Philippines, our forefathers were headhunters; without the use of sword but only through the Love of Jesus, we're now at least called human. Open your eyes and see what Jesus' Words did to civilize the world - in fact, didn' t His word is now saving you? If, his word is crook do you think Israel still exist? I believe satan would have no need for Islam to eliminate the people of G-d. But, we are not here to judge but witness the power of G-d slowly revealing His Love to you. Maybe in 10-20years from now, your rabbis can no longer hide the fact about Yeshua. And I am not surprise you will be singing another lyrics which is praising Jesus as the son of G-d. Bless G-d he gave the gentiles hope of salvation through your blinded eyes.

[@Braglemaster123]

Yes!!

[@johnperry1645]

I get it. Moses was real, you can trust the Torah. But Jesus wasn’t real because you can’t trust the New Testament.

[@thereisonlyone6357]

@@faithfultheology The Dome of Rock is the sight where prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven and prayed with Moses, Jesus and came back. Inside the building in classical Arabic is inscribed, “O you People of the Book, overstep not bounds in your religion, and of God speak only the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, is only an apostle of God, and his Word which he conveyed unto Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from him. Believe therefore in God and his apostles, and say not Three. It will be better for you. God is only one God. Far be it from his glory that he should have a son.”

[@belajuhasz7449]

From where did they got the information now and 2000 years ago

[@joelrodriguez1232]

Jesus mysticism and flat Earth theories are on the same level, even though the latter one sounds more plausible.

[@vivahernando1]

Joel Rodriguez no they aren't. We have empirical evidence the Earth is spherical while the evidence for Jesus is a book that says he walked on water, cast out demons, and came back to life after being dead for three days. Not on the same level

[@zatoichiable]

Why are the european christians abandon christianity? why are they being religious only in attacking Islam than practicing their religion?

[@swissapologetics]

Because Islam is Antichrist...

[@gwolf6975]

Great talk, thanks.

[@teaburg]

Any thoughts on how to trust the historicity of the prophets in Judaism? How is the evidence that they actually existed, said everything they said, traveled where they are supposed to have gone?

[@ToviaSinger1]

My nation encountered them. They changed out lives. Their legacy remains with us in their prophetic work.

[@jorybrosted7298]

@@ToviaSinger1 seems like these three things are true about Jesus as well. I don’t have a stake in either as I’m not religious, but it seems like those three points you just made could be applied to Jesus as well.

[@goldengun9970]

@@jorybrosted7298 no. Jesus didn't give a national revelation. Same thing is not claimed even

[@user-lj9zq4dr5t]

@@goldengun9970 He absolutly did, Christians are everywhere in the world.

[@madmonkee6757]

So you're saying that people who study literature, who study the fictional characters of Shakespeare or of Jane Austin, that they've wasted their life? Because Mr. Darcy didn't exist, the scholars that study Austin have wasted their lives on something meaningless? Because that's basically what you're saying about NT scholars, and it sounds just as silly either way.

[@KrishnaSingh-ru7fu]

Nice

[@jewishtexan8545]

Jesus being flesh & blood does not matter, the fact remains he failed as the messiah. The Messiah is born of two human parents, But Jesus, according to Christian theology, was born of the union between a human woman and Gd (as were many other pagan deities,) rather than two human parents. The Messiah can trace his lineage through his human biological father, back to King David (Isaiah 11:1,10; Jeremiah 23:5; Ezekiel 34:23-24; 37:21-28; Jeremiah 30:7-10; 33:14-16; Hosea 3:4-5). According to Christian theology, Jesus's father was Gd. Therefore, Jesus' lineage does not go through his human 'father' -- Joseph, the husband of Mary. The Messiah gathers to Israel all of the twelve tribes (Ezekiel 36:24). The Messiah rebuilds the Temple (Isaiah 2:2; Ezekiel 37:26-28). After the Messiah comes, there will be no more famine (Ezekiel 36:29-30). After the Messiah comes, death will eventually cease (Isaiah 25:8). The Jews will be sought out for spiritual guidance (Zechariah 8:23). All weapons will be destroyed (Ezekiel 39:9,12). Even Christians recognize that the changes the real Messiah will make, according to the Bible and Judaism, have not yet happened. This is why Christianity had to invent the idea of a Second Coming. The real Messiah has no need to come a second time to do those things -- he must do them the first time around in order to actually be the Messiah. So again, Jesus being a real man or not does not matter, he was a False Messiah, and if he was real he deserved death.

[@amberwavesrn]

JESUS lineage can be traced to David thru Mary I'm pretty sure. The prophecy that you mention refer to the 2nd coming.

[@jewishtexan8545]

***** Your House comes through your father, not the mother, Jesus had no biological father according to the Christian Faith, so that disqualifies him, sorry, & like I said "Christians recognize that the changes the real Messiah will make, according to the Bible and Judaism, have not yet happened. This is why Christianity had to invent the idea of a Second Coming. The real Messiah has no need to come a second time to do those things -- he must do them the first time around in order to actually be the Messiah."

[@brenosantana1458]

Joseph is the biological father of Jesus.

[@johnmackinnon7321]

WAIT FOR IT ! HE WILL DO ALL OF THAT !!

[@johnmackinnon7321]

@@jewishtexan8545 No they had invent two messiahs ! One suffering servant and the other The King Messiah !!!!

[@McGyver777ATGMAIL]

The problem with this world is summarized thusly. Kardashians get millions of views and Tovia doesn't. People should care more about the reality of existence over reality tv. TY Tovia, you freed my mind from Rome's church's dogma and theology, the greatest gift anyone could ever give another mind: liberty.

[@McGyver777ATGMAIL]

+Preps Etcetera​ you resemble a man scolding a child learning to walk for falling down too much. Incapable of seeing your own vanity, piety, and self righteous nature you continue to harp on the failings of your brothers instead of being witness to the fact that the very ego which was that which brought the children of Israel to their knees is the same failing you have displayed here-in to a degree which harkens to those that did build ovens. Few men have ever written words which are the very mirror they themselves should look into, for as I have read all you have written in this thread I see no love for your brother but a vitriolic lashing out against a primitive people being primitive, and a faithful people failing to walk always in that faith. You are condemning them for being human. Your condemnation of them is as fleeting as is your ignorance of their deity. And the Roman corruption you follow has caused a horrible vanity to capture your very being where you think it right to flaunt your suppositional salvation while condemning them for killing the very prophets you also would have stoned being in great ignorance in this very modern age we find ourselves. Until you are willing to put yourself on the cross, stop following the teachings of Rome's false church, and wish to save your brothers and sisters before yourself you will never understand anything even remotely close to real righteousness. You use your vapid and filthy rags form of false salvation through murder and cannibalism to condemn your brother or sister in a type of arrogance found in a morning star being.

[@McGyver777ATGMAIL]

*****​ What does their considerations have to do with anything? If you are from the same Father you are brothers regardless of whether treating one another or accepting each other as brothers is the evidenced end. There is no messiah (anointed *man* who directly causes the messianic age to happen and has the government rest upon his shoulders) to deny. The inherent problem of Christianity is their lack of counting ability. The New Testament states he came, died, left, and returned. Then he left again. Having fulfilled none of the prophecies which are required to be the messiah of the messianic age (but there are many messiah, meaning anointed men, just not the messiah of that age). Christianity talks of a second coming, a false idea altogether because it would be his third coming based upon the New Testament record. They can't even get the number of returns right and claim him to be a "lamb" offering during Passover which removes sin. The lamb offering was never a sin offering. Passover has nothing to do with cleansing sin but instead being passed over by a pestilence or death, and no messiah has come which can lay claim to the title of "the" messiah. We do not call first year medical students doctors. Calling Yehshua of Nazareth "the" messiah of the messianic age is presumptive. If he returns and fulfills that which he must it will not take faith, for Israel and all the world will see it. And if it is another who cares. Jesus was reported as saying that we can do things greater than he did and that another would come. It could be anyone. Having faith that a man's brutal murder and your taking part in cannibalistic acts is your salvation stands against just about everything the Tanakh / Torah teach. In plain language, you are imprisoned by dogma of a failed corrupt state religion formed by primitive men at councils. Good luck with that.

[@McGyver777ATGMAIL]

***** loaded question full of preconceptions based upon fallacious thoughts bound unto primitive disproven and mythological fairytales. Good luck with all that.

[@McGyver777ATGMAIL]

111gagafan Did I ask your opinion? Did I post on here asking you to say anything to me? Would someone please review this comment section and locate where I give a (edited) what you think? You don't know a thing about me. My scientific mindedness. My ideas about deity. Nothing. Nada. I didn't state those here. So your comment is displaying your problem. Vanity. Ego. You think you know something. Bravo. Go somewhere else and comment to someone who cares. All you are to me, is vapor. Wisp. Hot air.

[@McGyver777ATGMAIL]

111gagafan You stated that I "do not think." ...priceless. Remember you said that...will be funny and ironic someday. How do you come to such conclusions about a person you have never met, who has said nothing about themselves, nothing about education level, nothing about my past...for someone accusing me of not thinking your argument from ignorance is quite telling.

[@inhumanhyena]

I always assumed they chose Nazareth because it's obscurity, and Jesus ("salvation") is God, the reason his ancestry is Bethlehem is clearly to connect him to David. In john ("nothing good can come from Nazareth") is part of the great irony that prevades the "New Testament", the first will be last and such. Are you familiar with the work of Richard Carrier? You're much more qualified to tackle this question than Erman, he's one of those academics that won't address an actual argument because he's too busy making a career. Does a disservice to profession imo. We need real engagements. I appreciate what you've done here even if I'm not totally sold on the argument.

[@inhumanhyena]

I did some more research amd found a few interesting quotes from Richard Carrier on Nazareth: "the scriptures the Christians were then using predicted three things about the messiah (and we know this, because they say so): that he would be born in Bethlehem, that he would come from Galilee (even though Bethlehem isn’t in Galilee), and that he would be a “Nazorian,” which actually doesn’t mean someone from Nazareth (the word is significantly different, though similar enough to sound almost like it). Matthew tried to make his story fit all three predictions by choosing a town in Galilee that sounded almost like Nazors, and then inventing an excuse to have Jesus born in Bethlehem but “come from” Galilee." "That’s if Mark 1:9 is genuine, though it might not be. It’s an unusually worded verse for Mark. And the only place he ever says Jesus came from Nazareth; when Mark’s narrative seems to consistently imply he came from Capernaum; and elsewhere Mark consistently called Jesus a Nazorian (before later scribal emendations, as we see from the manuscripts and Matthew and Luke’s use of Mark), which again, does not mean someone from Nazareth. Likewise Acts says the Christians were originally called Nazorians, even though none of them came from Nazareth, and Nazorian again doesn’t mean someone who did. And there are second century Christians who indeed say it meant something else." "there is no evidence Nazareth was so despised or backward as usually claimed; and having the messiah come from a humble origin was not only exactly in line with the gospel the Christians wanted to promote (that the messiah would be the most humbled, that the least shall be first, and so on), it was also in line with even some pagan hero narratives (where a hero may end up coming from the most humble origins, e.g. raised by poor shepherds in a backwards town etc.), and actually admired by the public, and only offensive to the aristocratic elite, the very people the gospels condemn and make no effort to woo."

[@mthokozisilanga4497]

The hypothesis I prefare not that I say is correct, is that Matthew and Luke are using Bethlehem, answering those who questions the narrative that Jesus cannot be the Messiah for some many reasons, he is also from Nazareth. So as they are the later writers, they seem to counter that argument by saying, its his parents who are from Narazeth, he was born in Nazareth( Matthew). Then this contradicts the former story, the Luke says yes Jesus is from Narazeth because that is where he grew up, but was born in Bethlehem. These to me sounds like apologetic arguments made by Jesus’s sect religion.

[@anthonyjohn9000]

Make the explanation on the basis of prophesy about jesus which are fullfilled. If you do not agree please explain the prophesies word to word, I think that will be fantastic. I will be happy to hear your explanation.

[@TheHookahSmokingCaterpillar]

There are no prophecies, just quotations taken out of context.

[@ronmey7500]

@@TheHookahSmokingCaterpillar There are very detailed New Testament prophecies about the Jews being re-established in their country after their time of dispersion came to an end. This happened right on schedule in the middle of the 20th century. Some scholars from the 18th and 19th century, like for instance Adam Clarke, were predicting this event long before it happened, based on Bible prophecy.

[@TheHookahSmokingCaterpillar]

@@ronmey7500 There are no prophecies in the Bible.

[@alphaomega3499]

Can we have an analysis of Orthodox versus Karaites, with the arguments and evidence, please?

[@moviehits777]

5:22 Is there historical Moses? Honest question

[@anthonyjohn9000]

If there is God then there is Moses.

[@JohnSmith-yw9nk]

I am not a Christian but I agree with the majority of historians and scholars that most likely the historical Jesus existed. Scholars who specialise in the origins of Christianity agree on very little, but they do generally agree that it is most likely that a historical preacher, on whom the Christian figure "Jesus Christ" is based, did exist. The numbers of professional scholars, out of the many thousands in this and related fields, who don't accept this consensus, can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Many may be more cautious about using the term "historical fact" about this idea, since as with many things in ancient history it is not quite as certain as that. But it is generally regarded as the best and most parsimonious explanation of the evidence and therefore the most likely conclusion that can be drawn. The opposite idea - that there was no historical Jesus at all and that "Jesus Christ" developed out of some purely mythic ideas about a non-historical, non-existent figure - has had a chequered history over the last 200 years, but has usually been a marginal idea at best. Its heyday was in the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Century, when it seemed to fit with some early anthropological ideas about religions evolving along parallel patterns and being based on shared archetypes, as characterised by Sir James Frazer's influential comparative religion study 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘯 𝘉𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩(1890). But it fell out of favour as the Twentieth Century progressed and was barely held by any scholars at all by the 1960s. More recently the "Jesus Myth" hypothesis has experienced something of a revival, largely via the internet, blogging and "print on demand" self-publishing services. But its proponents are almost never scholars, many of them have a very poor grasp of the evidence and almost all have clear ideological objectives. Broadly speaking, they fall into two main categories: (i) New Agers claiming Christianity is actually paganism rebadged and (ii) anti-Christian atheist activists seeking to use their "exposure" of historical Jesus scholarship to undermine Christianity. Both claim that the consensus on the existence of a historical Jesus is purely due to some kind of iron-grip that Christianity still has on the subject, which has suppressed and/or ignored the idea that there was no historical Jesus at all. In fact, there are some very good reasons there is a broad scholarly consensus on the matter and that it is held by scholars across a wide range of beliefs and backgrounds, including those who are atheists and agnostics (e.g. Bart Ehrman, Maurice Casey, Paula Fredriksen) and Jews (e.g. Geza Vermes, Hyam Maccoby).

[@JohnSmith-yw9nk]

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮 ❞𝗠𝘆𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗰❞ 𝗢𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗝𝗲𝘀𝘂𝘀 𝗦𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 The weaknesses of the Mythicist hypothesis multiply when its proponents turn to coming up with their own explanation as to how the Jesus stories did arise if there was no historical Jesus. Of course, many of them don't really bother much with presenting an alternative explanation and leave their ideas about exactly how this happened conveniently vague. But some realise that we have late First Century stories that all claim there was an early First Century person who lived within living memory and then make a series of claims about him. If there was no such person, the Mythicist does need to explain how the stories about his existence arose and took the form they do. And they need to do so in a way that accounts for the evidence better than the parsimonious idea that this was believed because there was such a person. This is where Mythicism really falls down. The Mythicist theories fall into four main categories: 1. "𝐽𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑠 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑔𝑎𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑛 𝑚𝑦𝑡ℎ𝑠, 𝑏𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑡𝑜𝑔𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑎 𝑚𝑦𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑐 𝑓𝑖𝑔𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑔𝑜𝑑-𝑚𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒." This is the explanation offered by the New Age writer who calls herself "Acharya S" in a series of self-published books beginning with The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold (1999). Working from late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Century theosophist claims which exaggerate parallels between the Jesus stories and pagan myths, she makes the typical New Age logical leap from "similarity" to "parallel" and finally to "connection" and "causation". Leaving aside the fact that many of these "parallels" are highly strained, with any miraculous conception or birth story becoming a "virgin birth" or anything to do with a death or a tree becoming a "crucifixion" (even if virginity or a cross is not involved in either), it is very hard to make the final leap from "parallel" to "causation". This is particularly hard because of the masses of evidence that the first followers of the Jesus sect were devout Jews - a group for whom the idea of adopting anything "pagan" would have been utterly horrific. These were people who cut their hair short because long hair was associated with pagan, Hellenistic culture or who shunned gymnasia and theatres because of their association with pagan culture. All the evidence actually shows that the earliest Jesus sect went through a tumultuous period in its first years trying to accommodate non-Jews into their devoutly Jewish group. To claim that these people would merrily adopt myths of Horus and Attis and Dionysius and then amalgamate them into a story about a pagan/Jewish hybrid Messiah (who didn't exist) and then turn around and forget he didn't exist and claim he did and that he did so just a few decades earlier is clearly a nonsense hypothesis. 2. "𝐽𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑠 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑎 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑚 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑢𝑛𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑝ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑛 𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑡ℎ𝑙𝑦 𝑏𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑙 𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟." This is the theory presented by another self-published Mythicist author, Earl Doherty, first in The Jesus Puzzle (2005) and then in Jesus : Neither God nor Man (2009). Doherty's theory has several main flaws. Firstly, he claims that this mythic/celestial Jesus was based on a Middle Platonic view of the cosmos that held that there was a "fleshly sub-lunar realm" in the heavens where gods and celestial beings lived and acted out mythic events. This is the realm, Doherty claims, in which it was believed that Mithras slew the cosmic bull, where Attis lived and died and where Jesus was crucified and rose again. The problem here is Doherty does very little to back up this claim and, while non-specialist readers may not realise this from the way he presents this idea, it is not something accepted by historians of ancient thought but actually a hypothesis developed entirely by Doherty himself. He makes it seem like this idea is common knowledge amongst specialists in Middle Platonic philosophy, while never quite spelling out that it's something he's made up. The atheist Biblical scholar Jeffrey Gibson has concluded: "... 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘋[𝘰𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘵𝘺]'𝘴 𝘩𝘺𝘱𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘺, 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘔𝘪𝘥𝘥𝘭𝘦 𝘗𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘮. 𝘐𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘦𝘥, 𝘪𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘰𝘱𝘩𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺, 𝘔𝘪𝘥𝘥𝘭𝘦 𝘗𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘮." Secondly, Doherty's thesis requires the earliest Christian writings about Jesus, the letters of Paul, to be about this "celestial/mythic Jesus" and not a historical, earthly one. Except, as has been pointed out above, Paul's letters do contain a great many references to an earthly Jesus that don't fit with Doherty's hypothesis at all. Doherty has devoted a vast number of words in both his books explaining ways that these references can be read so that his thesis does not collapse, but these are contrived and in places quite fanciful. Finally, Doherty's explanations as to how this "celestial/mythic Jesus" sect gave rise to a "historical/earthly Jesus" sect and then promptly disappeared without trace strain credulity. Despite being the original form of Christianity and despite surviving, according to Doherty, well into the Second Century, this celestial Jesus sect vanished without leaving any evidence of its existence behind and was undreamt of until Doherty came along and deduced that it had once existed. This is very difficult to believe. Early Christianity was a diverse, divided and quarrelsome faith, with a wide variety of sub-sects, offshoots and "heresies", all arguing with each other and battling for supremacy. What eventually emerged from this riot of Christianities was a form of "orthodoxy" that had all the elements of Christianity today: the Trinity, Jesus as the divine incarnate, a physical resurrection etc. But we know of many of the other rivals to this orthodoxy largely thanks to orthodox writings attacking them and refuting their claims and doctrines. Doherty expects us to believe that despite all these apologetic literature condemning and refuting a wide range of "heresies" there is not one that bothers to even mention this original Christianity that taught Jesus was never on earth at all. This beggar's belief. Doherty's thesis is much more popular amongst atheists than the New Age imaginings of "Acharya S" but has had no impact on the academic sphere partly because self-published hobbyist efforts don't get much attention, but mainly because of the flaws noted above. Doherty and his followers maintain, of course, that it's because of a kind of academic conspiracy, much as Creationists and Holocaust deniers do.

[@JohnSmith-yw9nk]

3. "𝐽𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑠 𝑏𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑔𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙, 𝑠𝑦𝑚𝑏𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑓𝑖𝑔𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑀𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑎ℎ 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑔𝑜𝑡 'ℎ𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑑' 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡 ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑟 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑" This idea has been presented in most detail by another amateur theorist in yet another self-published book: R.G. Price's Jesus - A Very Jewish Myth(2007). Unlike "Acharya S" and, to a lesser extent Doherty, Price at least takes account of the fact that the Jesus stories and the first members of the Jesus sect are completely and fundamentally Jewish, so fantasies about Egyptian myths or Greek Middle Platonic philosophy are not going to work as points of origin for them. According to this version of Jesus Mythicism, Jesus was an idealisation of what the Messiah was to be like who got turned into a historical figure largely by mistake and misunderstanding. Several of the same objections to Doherty's thesis can be made about this one - if this was the case, why are there no remnants of debates with or condemnations of those who believed the earlier version and maintained there was no historical Jesus at all? And why don't any of Christianity's enemies use the fact that the original Jesus sect didn't believe in a historical Jesus as an argument against the new version of the sect? Did everyone just forget? More tellingly, if the Jesus stories arose out of ideas about and expectations of the Messiah, it is very odd that Jesus doesn't fit those expectations better. Despite Christian claims to the contrary, the first Christians had to work very hard to convince fellow Jews that Jesus was the Messiah precisely because he didn't conform to these expectations. Most importantly, there was absolutely no tradition or Messianic expectation that told of the Messiah being executed and then rising from the dead - this first appears with Christianity and has no Jewish precedent at all. Far from evolving from established Messianic prophecies and known elements in the scripture, the first Christians had to scramble to find anything at all which looked vaguely like a "prophecy" of this unexpected and highly unMessianic event. That the centre and climax of the story of Jesus would be based on his shameful execution and death makes no sense if it evolved out of Jewish expectations about the Messiah, since they contained nothing about any such idea. This climax to the story only makes sense if it actually happened, and then his followers had to find totally new and largely strained and contrived "scriptures" which they then claimed "predicted" this outcome, against all previous expectation. Price's thesis fails because Jesus' story doesn't conform to Jewish myths enough. 4. "𝐽𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑠 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑛𝑜𝑡 𝑎 𝐽𝑒𝑤𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑏𝑢𝑡 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑒𝑙𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑛 𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑔𝑎𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑜 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑔𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛" This is the least popular of the Jesus Myth hypotheses, but versions of it are argued by Italian amateur theorist Francesco Carotta (𝐽𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑠 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝐶𝑎𝑒𝑠𝑎𝑟: 𝑂𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐽𝑢𝑙𝑖𝑎𝑛 𝑂𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝐶ℎ𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑦. 𝐴𝑛 𝐼𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑔𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑅𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 - 2005)), computer programmer Joseph Atwill (𝐶𝑎𝑒𝑠𝑎𝑟'𝑠 𝑀𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑎ℎ: 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑅𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑛 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑝𝑖𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑦 𝑡𝑜 𝐼𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝐽𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑠 - 2005) and accountant Daniel Unterbrink (𝐽𝑢𝑑𝑎𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝐺𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑛: 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐹𝑙𝑒𝑠ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐵𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑑 𝐽𝑒𝑠𝑢𝑠 - 2004). Carotta claims Jesus was actually Julius Caesar and imposed on Jewish tradition as part of the cult of the 𝐷𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑢𝑠 𝐽𝑢𝑙𝑖𝑢𝑠. Atwill claims Jesus was actually the deliberate creation of the Emperor Titus, imposed on Judaism in the same way. Neither do a very good job of substantiating these claims or of explaining why the Romans then turned around, as early as 64 AD (fifteen years before Titus became emperor) and began persecuting the cult they supposedly created. No scholar takes these theories or that of Unterbrink seriously. No scholar also argues that Jesus was an amalgam of various Jewish preachers or other figures of the time. That is because there is nothing in the evidence to indicate this. This ideas has never been argued in any detailed form by anyone at all, scholar or Jesus myth amateur theorist, but it is something some who don't want to subscribe to the idea that "Jesus Christ" was based on a real person resorts to so that they can put some sceptical distance between the Christian claims and anything or anyone historical. It seems to be a purely rhetorically-based idea, with no substance and no argument behind it.

[@NeedsEvidence]

4:24 I don't understand Singer's insinuation that it is essential for New Testament scholars for Jesus to be an historical figure (hence their "consensus" Jesus existed). One can study the New Testament w.r.t. to factors that don't depend on the historicity of Jesus: the possible origins of the gospels and other books, the comparison of language styles used, the nature of the many contradictions between different gospels, the commonalities with to other mythologies, etc. But maybe I don't know what a New Testament scholar actually does.

[@johnmackinnon7321]

You are confused !

[@johnmackinnon7321]

This one studies The Torah and the prophets !

[@arieraaphorst1998]

NeedsEvidence I also noticed that. It’s an insinuation and a stupid argument too.

[@edwardmiessner6502]

@NeedsEvidence Just listen to Bart Ehrman sometime. NT scholars to a man regard scholars who publicly claim Jesus never existed are not real scholars at all, but merely cranks. Dr Ehrman used to say that a scholar has to be qualified in New Testament scholarship or a related field to be taken seriously. But because of Robert M Price and Richard Carrier, both PhD-credentialed scholars in related fields, he now says only scholars who work in the field of NT scholarship are serious about the existence or non-existence of Jesus.

[@sibonelelohlatshwayo7753]

This guy's argument can be used against his beliefs too. Can he provide a historical evidence that Moses existed?

[@brotherj1405]

No he cannot

[@shannonchuprevich3021]

You guys are missing the point. He based from the point of view that there is no traditional recorded Jewish documents of Jesus. If you're a scholar study JEWISH texts too. Zealot Christians say Jesus replaces Traditional Hebrew doctrines, nullified them. Especially if you have non Hebrew ancestors.

[@welchce]

I think you might be missing the point friend when you say Zealot Christians what exactly do you mean? Are you categorizing all Christians of zealots or do you just mean certain sects of Christianity? Not all Christians believe that the Hebrew scriptures are nullified and certainly we don't think the Hebrew Bible or the Old Testament are done away with or useless in fact some of my favorite scriptures are in the Tanakh there are lots of Christians out there who believe in the Old Testament believe in the laws at least to some degree possibly greater than many noahides. I'd be careful to group us all together not every Christian is a confirmed Catholic and a lot of a struggle over these things that are honest enough to be on this page to listen we're not a tiny minority. Again I don't know if you meant specific Christians who are zealots that term is a little lost on me in writing. Forgive me if I'm assuming too much and what I'm about to say but my guess would be that all you know about Christianity is what you heard through a rabbi maybe I'm totally wrong it's just a hunch but everything you know about Christian doctrine you're learning from somebody like tovia singer granted he has studied the New Testament a bit and he has some valid opinions but he does not speak for Christianity nor does he always accurately portray it!

[@shannonchuprevich3021]

Do you have believe that Jesus was born to a virgin and his flesh rose to heaven to call yourself a true believer in the Messiah(which does NOT mean son of GOD)? I am not Greek Roman, or Jewish. In reality I never needed a miracle to realize, that if God is a living God, God has a choice too. Look around you. Jesus WAS a rebel against Roman authority. An authority that claimed it's right to rule with men and women, alike, being worshiped as gods. The rebellion nuked this fallacy at a great cost. There is Historical value to this for me as an American citizen whose ancestors fled from those that still refuse to give up their self proclaimed power. It has corrupted EVERYONE, made slaves, destroyed native populations, reckless management of our environment, the list goes on and on. Sorry if I sound like I'm unfaithful, but If I say nothing, truly then, I am unfaithful. I would be judging ALL parties involved, even myself.

[@johnnyboy3357]

There is a reason why christian seminaries or bible schools teach church History only during the final semester before graduation and not during freshman years, if students learned the truth early on, then they'd quit already, so the curriculum arranged that church History be taught last so that students will be compelled to finish the course instead, what is it about church history? It teaches that the new testament was created and canonized by ROMAN empire scholars, so if its not jewish to begin with, and its a fabrication like a soap opera script, all the contents, characters and plots are all fiction, if christianity is based on fiction it should be abolished completely, why they still continue? Congregants revenues via offerings

[@nicknchrist]

What caused Yeshua to die in the matter of 6 hours was the methods that were used and the extent to which He was beaten,bruised pierced and received stripes...

[@nicknchrist]

@@Doriesep6622 yes we've been brainwashed to believe Yeshua didn't exist but there's still hope. There are still jews getting saved and sharing the good news.

[@ronmey7500]

@@Doriesep6622 Our brains need washing.

[@kkirchhevel]

While josephs brothers were hungry with their children, other people were getting food from Joseph. News traveled that there was food in Egypt. Their hunger led them to go to Egypt and bow before their brother in fulfillment of the dream they hated. Messiah said I am the bread that came down from heaven that gives life to the world...

[@MA-oe1pu]

What's the point?

[@patriciatreslove146]

Thank you for this video Rabbi

[@swissapologetics]

*The Gospel in the Psalms* *You are my Son; today I have begotten you.* (2,7) *Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor.* (8,5) *All who hate me whisper together about me; they imagine the worst for me.* (41,7) *Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me.* (41,9) *Malicious witnesses rise up; they ask me of things that I do not know* (35,11) *they have pierced my hands and feet* (22,16) *He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken.* (34,20) *they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots.* (22,18) *My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?* (22,2) *They gave me poison for food, and for my thirst they gave me sour wine to drink.* (69,21) *My enemies say of me in malice, “When will he die, and his name perish?”* (41,5) *They say, “A deadly thing is poured out on him; he will not rise again from where he lies.”* (41,8) *But you, O Lord, be gracious to me, and raise me up, that I may repay them!* (41,10) *Add to them punishment upon punishment; may they have no acquittal from you.* (69,27) *Let them be blotted out of the book of the living; let them not be enrolled among the righteous.* (69,28) *For they persecute him whom you have struck down, and they recount the pain of those you have wounded.* (69,26) *The Lord redeems the life of his servants; none of those who take refuge in him will be condemned.* (34,22) *Blessed is the man against whom the Lord counts no iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no deceit.* (32,2) *Therefore let everyone who is godly offer prayer to you at a time when you may be found; surely in the rush of great waters, they shall not reach him.* (32,6)

[@shawnalLovesJesus]

@@swissapologetics Also Isaiah 53.

[@swissapologetics]

@@shawnalLovesJesus Yes, correct 😊 And here: *Namemeanings of the Bloodline Adam to Noah in Genesis* (Word-interpretation like Daniel did in Dan 5,25-29) *Man (is)* [Adam] *appointed* [Seth] *mortal* [Enosh] *sorrow* [Kenan]; *(but) the Blessed God* [Mahalalel] *shall come down* [Jared], *teaching (that)* [Enoch] *his death shall bring* [Methuselah] *(the) despairing* [Lamech] *rest* [Noah].

[@shawnalLovesJesus]

@@swissapologetics Thank you! :D ♥

[@DjIsaacsOfficialSite]

@@shawnalLovesJesus using Isaiah 53 and the psalms you quoted is not helping you cause the suffering servant and the son that was begotten is Israel. Rabbi Tovia Singer explains this for informational purposes. Just search rabbi Tovia Singer and enter besides his name whatever topic you want to know.

[@hankwalter9717]

Tovia needs the same experience that Paul had on the road to Damascus, or with the 120 in the upperoom, your intellectual learning can never bring the revealation of God to you,tovia needs to be born again,that's all that's lacking, then God can use you, talk all you want,that's all intellectual learning,moses had that to till he met God in the burning bush

[@nonegiven9727]

@Mad Dog Avraham Your just afraid because you don't know how to believe. Everyone of us out here didn't know either until the God of this universe showed us how. All you have is head knowledge and no wisdom. Your knee will bend with the rest of us that He ever created. The heart you have is a stone and God alone has blinded you from Him. You don't have anything on the Christian, its all your doing, you have no one to blame by yourself. You think your wise, guess what!

[@Lion_Hamza]

If you would have told Jesus about born again, talking in tongues, he would have understood absolutely nothing. That’s a yankee invention.

[@anti_missionary_mission]

What experience are you describing? Since the book of acts writes 3 different instances of the the same situation? Furthermore Torah explains that it's not aloud to create a new religion or following G-ds that your forefathers didn't knew. Even false prophets will stand up, and will be able to mirecles. So yes experiences are overrated. And the prophetic era was closed already before Jesus set foot on earth

[@daspecialist1220]

Sorry but anyone who does diligent research will soon see paul was a liar, manipulator, murderer.

[@daspecialist1220]

Sorry but anyone who does diligent research will soon see paul was a liar, manipulator, murderer.

[@ajitkapadia8950]

Good

[@zeus-cu4ft]

Paul wrote before the gospels, he never mentioned Nazareth or Bethlehem, or the virgin birth . Never mentioned Pontius Pilate or judas iscariot, Paul never mentioned Joseph father of Jesus nor he mentioned the disciples. Paul always talk to a celestial Jesus, he never places him on earth. Only in the gospels which came much later the author of the gospel of mark (written in the year 72 CE) bring Jesus down to earth, and mark never called him Jesus of Nazareth but called him Jesus the NAZARENE(offshoot of Judaism). Mathew changed the word Nazarene to Nazareth to create a hometown for this fictional character(Jesus ). If Jesus was a Jewish rabbi preaching religious doctrines; why then invent all these miracles and fictional names and towns in the gospel around a normal religious guy. What was the reason? For me it seems more a fictional story invented by pagan Jews after the destruction of the temple and the raze of Jerusalem as a way of explaining the suffering and catastrophe of the distraught people of jacob(israel). the same method that was used in the Old Testament to describe miracles and Jewish histories is the same method used to describe the life of Jesus. It's all written by Jewish authors . The story of Jesus is as fictional as the story of prophet JONAH and we know Jonah did not exist and he did not live inside a big fish for three days and three nights. Same Jewish narrative: bugs bunny, Spider-Man , super man .