Hi everyone. I just want to say I'm very sorry about the confusion with today's episode. First it was scheduled incorrectly for Friday. Then, in trying to game the algorithm I tried to reupload it earlier today but realized I uploaded the wrong file. Now, I see I don't have the finished file but the rougher uploaded one still works so I thought I'd share it to at least have something for Easter Monday. On a related note, I'll be hiring a digital assistant (5-10 hours per week) soon to hopefully that will keep things running smoother. If you would like to help me with the Counsel of Trent and my other projects, keep an eye out for a link soon to apply. And once again, I'm sorry for the haphazard upload of today's episode.
I was wondering what had happened Friday. Saw it pop up in my feed and went, “yay! New Trent episode!” And then five minutes later it wasn’t there anymore. I figured either 1) you goofed the episode release or 2) the video got flagged for “hate speech” or something. 🤔 glad it was just a technical issue 😇
You are an uneducated liar who follows the bible, a book written by uneducated men who married children within their own bloodlines and believed in witchery.....that's your source.... 🤣 Such dishonesty ...
I remember once objecting (respectully) to a fairly malicious anti-Catholic comment regarding Mary's virginity on Tovia Singer's channel, and as a reply I got "why do you hate us Jews"? It's a charming environment.
they are the only nobody is allowed to critisize. they never mention the h0Iodom0r because yagoda, marx, and lenin were all part of that cult. one of them even founded the church of satan, which confirms rev3:9
In Isaiah 53:11, a few of our English translations have the following text with a footnote: “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied.” The footnote to the reading in the ESV says, “Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scroll he shall see light.” The ESV translates the received text “he will see” (יִרְאֶה yir’eh). But most English translations read against the received text and with three Dead Sea Scrolls (1QIsaa 1QIsab 4QIsad) and the Hebrew text of the Greek translator, all of which preserve the word “light” for what the Servant sees (“he will see light” יראה אור yir’eh ’ôr). Most textual critics and English translators have adopted the reading found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and therefore, have something like: “After his anguish, he will see light and be satisfied” (CSB). The received text probably omitted accidentally the word “light” because the word “will see” in Hebrew is similar to it and the omission can be explained as accidental. The metaphor “to see light” refers to having life. In Job 3:16, Job asks why he was not hidden like a miscarried child or like infants who did not see light. In Job 33:28, 30, Elihu envisions God as the one who redeems one’s soul from the pit and one’s life then can see light. In Isaiah 53, the servant died vicariously and was buried in a tomb. In Isaiah 53:11, “seeing light” refers to the resurrection of the Servant from the dead because of his work. He will see light and be satisfied in his knowledge, that is, his obedience in covenant relationship with the Lord. As a result, the Lord’s righteous Servant will now justify the many. The resurrection @Nc Cognito Many commentators find this reading too difficult and our translations have glossed over the difficulties in the actual text. But one need not despair. Many textual critics and commentators have discerned that the original text has been preserved in the Septuagint or the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, since that version has “to death” (εἰς θάνατον), which probably translated a Hebrew text having “to death” (לַמָּוֶת lammaweth). There is only one letter (ת) difference between this reading and the received text, and it is probable that the Greek translation suggests a different and more original Hebrew text yielding the meaning: “He was cut off from the land of the living, because of the transgression of my people he was stricken to death.” Thus, the prophecy of Isaiah 53:8 originally predicted that the Servant would be stricken to death. He would die vicariously for his people’s transgressions, and the New Testament authors appear to have read accordingly the Song in relation to Jesus Christ’s work on the cross. In 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul notes that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures. There is no Old Testament passage that details this substitutionary death more than Isaiah 53. In Isaiah 53:9, several of our English translations have: “And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death” (ESV; cf. NIV). But the NRSV along with several others has: “They made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich.” The received text has “in his deaths” (בְּמֹתָיו bəmōthayw), which the later Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions all simplified to “in his death,” and some of our modern English translations followed suit. But the text is better preserved in 1QIsaa (the Great Isaiah Scroll) which has the reading “his hill” or “his tomb” (בומתו bômtô from בֹּ֫מֶת bōmeth). Therefore, with most commentators and translations, Isaiah 53:9 predicted that the Servant’s body would be laid in a tomb. It was no minor detail to the gospel writers to record that Jesus’ body be buried in a tomb, and Matthew even highlights that Joseph of Arimathea was a rich man (cf. Matt 27:57ff). In Isaiah 53:11, a few of our English translations have the following text with a footnote: “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied.” The footnote to the reading in the ESV says, “Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scroll he shall see light.” The ESV translates the received text “he will see” (יִרְאֶה yir’eh). But most English translations read against the received text and with three Dead Sea Scrolls (1QIsaa 1QIsab 4QIsad) and the Hebrew text of the Greek translator, all of which preserve the word “light” for what the Servant sees (“he will see light” יראה אור yir’eh ’ôr). Most textual critics and English translators have adopted the reading found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and therefore, have something like: “After his anguish, he will see light and be satisfied” (CSB). The received text probably omitted accidentally the word “light” because the word “will see” in Hebrew is similar to it and the omission can be explained as accidental. The metaphor “to see light” refers to having life. In Job 3:16, Job asks why he was not hidden like a miscarried child or like infants who did not see light. In Job 33:28, 30, Elihu envisions God as the one who redeems one’s soul from the pit and one’s life then can see light. In Isaiah 53, the servant died vicariously and was buried in a tomb. In Isaiah 53:11, “seeing light” refers to the resurrection of the Servant from the dead because of his work. He will see light and be satisfied in his knowledge, that is, his obedience in covenant relationship with the Lord. As a result, the Lord’s righteous Servant will now justify the many. The resurrection shows the vindication of the servant and becomes the ground for the justification of the many. This logic appears to be Paul’s own in Romans 4:24-25 where he interprets Christ’s death for our transgressions and his resurrection for our justification. textandcanon.org/recovering-the-resurrection-textual-criticism-and-easter/#:~:text=At%20end%20of%20Isaiah%2053,my%20people%E2%80%9D%20(%20ESV%2
Excellent to see that you've broken free of the curse that has befallen these people since 70 A.D. May the Lord keep you strong, you no doubt stood to lose a lot when choosing him over your tribe.
@@elgatofelix8917 Rabbi is a Hebrew word for Teacher, usually in a religious context. There can be rabbis who don't attack Christians, i.e. a teacher who isn't anti-Christian. A Hebrew speaker referring to their teacher doesn't outright mean they are against Christians.
@@EvilXtianity Matt 23 vs 8-11 "But you, do not be called 'Rabbi'; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Jesus was called “rabbi” in Matthew 26:25, 49; Mark 9:5, 11:21, 14:45; John 1:38, 49, 2:2, 4:31, 6:25, 9:2, 11:8). The word “rabbi,” as John informs us, is translated “teacher” (John 1:38)
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker _"Matt 23 vs 8-11 "But you, do not be called 'Rabbi'..."_ You know none of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus, right? More nonsense from Matthew- Matthew claims fulfillment of a prophecy that was never made- Matthew 2:23 "And he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene." Jesus is not called Emmanuel in any verse in the New Testament nor was he born of a virgin as prophesied in Isaiah 7:14. Matthew 1:23 "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel." Jesus falsely prophesies that the high priest would see his second coming. Matthew 26:64 "I say to all of you; from now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the“Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” clouds of heaven.” Matthew claims God is three: "Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit". (Matthew 28:19) God states that he is one: "The LORD is one." (Deuteronomy 6:4) Matthew claims 14 generations from David to Jesus. 1st and 2nd Kings states there were 20 generations. Jesus told his disciples that they would not die before his second coming: "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom". (Matthew 16:28)
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker If you have evidence that the Bible figure known as Jesus existed, provide it. However, it is an absolute fact that there is literally no contemporaneous evidence that Jesus ever existed. Paul made up the Jesus fiction in 48 AD after the Daniel 9:25 prophesy failed to fulfill. Shouldn't we expect that if God was walking around town for thirty years that the locals would have noticed at the time? Fun fact: none of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus.
Does Rabbi Tovia Singer genuinely believe that the reason Christians bring up the women at the tomb is that we argue that you should just believe all women?
@@carstontoedter1333 Yeah, I've only seen some content from him but he's a very smart man, he's definitely not making that shallow of an argument out of ignorance.
@@billyhw99 yeah I'd almost say he's worse than JW Became of what you said about his steelmanning claims and he won't debate anyone, at least not since Brown spanked him over a decade ago lol
As a Protestant, I very much admire the simple clarity and effectiveness of Trent's responses. While I am not a Catholic myself, I very much see the value that you bring to our faith in general. God Bless!
As Catholic I invite you to read and learn the Catholic faith since the Protestant religion was branched from the RCC the only church founded by Christ himself not by man. God bless you!!🙏🕊️
Exactly. Catholicism carried on the sacrificial nature of Judaism. Post-Temple Judaism dropped the sacrificial nature completely by historical necessity. Modern Judaism is an heretical offshoot of Old Testament Judaism.
It wasnt the same religion as soon as Christ came and fulfilled it. Really, modern judaism is nothing at all the Israel if the Bible, which was really the proto Church basically.
@@hamie7624 To say Christ fulfilled Judaism is to say Christianity is not a radically different religion from Judaism. Catholicism carries on and fulfills the sacrificial nature of Temple Judaism and so much more. So while it wasn't exactly the same after Christ, it was still VERY similar after Christ in the form of Christianity.
@@tonyl3762 Christ DID fulfill "Judaism". (In quotes because it wasn't really Judaism, which is a man made religion that came after Christ.) The Church is the true continuation and fulfillment of Israel, the People of God in the old testament. The whole point of it was to prepare the world for the Savior, and that purpose was fulfilled.
Tobia Singer is correct. There should have been 3200 mega pixel camera to record the event and they should be identical in all the Gospels in 2000 years ago. I feel sorry for his followers listening to his songs.
If it was just the topic rabbi singer expressed which is a valid argument, Jesus has enormous hurddles to overcome to be even concidered for the part of "the messiah" the most damiging argument against him is his connection to the tribe of Judah if the geneologies written by Mathew and Luke are Josephs NOT Jesus. So basicly the geneologies written in the NT are irrelevant.
@@avrahamisaacs2593 One genealogy is Jesus’s bloodline through Mary, and the other is the line leading to Jesus’s legal status as a foster son of Joseph. That’s why there are two genealogies for him in the New Testament.
As a Protestant, I really enjoy Trent’s channel a lot. Truly great material here! These conversations are so important to have, and hopefully we can bring more to Christ by being well-equipped with answers! Praise God, for Christ has risen!
Rabbi Singer is easy to refute, but I will take this. And honestly, Jews DO argue like atheists. They do. I was part of that world before. My rabbi’s motto was “question everything, even God”. So yeah, this is better than nothing. I am happy to finally see this video. Jews for Judaism has more tough stances and would like to see Trent tackle some of those.
@@AveChristusRex there’s a lot of nuance to it. I just don’t think typing it out on RUclips will help. You have to really learn jewish thought to understand their point a bit. Diving into actual religious Judaism is a rabbit hole and it’s worth exploring. I feel like it actually helped me come back to Catholicism and ask the right questions. It was how I was able to finally learn actual catholicism. I owe a lot to them, they helped me really understand the faith fully. If I would’ve never gone down that path, I would’ve forever abandoned Catholicism.
In addition or as part of the accounts, the rock blocking the entrance was not removed for the Resurrected to come out. In his resurrected body, our Lord did not require a door valet. The rock had been removed to allow witnesses to enter into the tomb. It was made open for us not for Him. Levi Shalom
I don't expect him to believe it, but I wish Singer would at least admit the Christian interpretation of Messianic prophecy is a coherent and historically based way to read it.
He will never admit that. Jewish apologists launch into spin zones on many of these arguments, and they spin hard. You have to pray for him and all Jews.
@@michellelaudet5363 ..Judaism is truth, whereas your faith is FALSE =idolatry and blasphemy against the ONE GD. You know nothing of Tanakh and can't read or understand Hebrew... Sorry, but you're WRONG! You will see , one day, if you are sincerely seeking Truth. You'll be clamoring and clinging to a Jew wanting to go with him/her because WE hold the truth. Happy Passover.
Rabbi Taqqiya Swinger would never discuss these topics with a knowledgeable Christian for fear of being exposed. Just look at his debate with Dr Michael Brown
I'm so glad you got this reuploaded! I was halfway threw it before it disappeared before. You are so good at defending the faith, thank God for people like you.
@@_ready__ we receive the free gift of eternal life threw our baptism which restores what what lost by the sin of Adam, but we can lose that free gift by freely choosing to reject God threw mortal sin, which is why we repent to God threw Confession where our friendship with Christ is reconciled as He pours His Blood on our souls, and washes away our sins which we have confessed. Step 1 to salvation: get baptized. Step 2: don't sin.
@@_ready__ if you read my whole response, this is why we have the Sacrament of Confession, because it's very hard not to go threw life within committing serious sins against God
Not to mention all the early apologetics against Christianity grant the empty tomb. All the early Jewish arguments against the resurrection that I have seen are that the body was stolen, which assumes that Jesus had been buried and the tomb was subsequently found empty.
Love how Trent recommended Dr. Michael Brown’s book at the end, it’s the one guy Tovia has debated and refuses to debate again because how well Dr. Brown knows Jewish sources. What’s more interesting is how the Jewish apologetics they use to prove Moses and the miracles, are the very apologetics we use to prove our faith. Massive witnesses, while the Jews state they have over 3 million witnesses to Mt. Sinai, we don’t need that many, we have the disciples, others who followed closely and 500 witnesses to his resurrection. Then we have St. Paul, who was an enemy and a student of Rabban Gamaliel, who still is a prominent figure in Judaism today. Nothing more convincing than an enemy turned to the faith. Add to that the prophecy fulfilled of the nations knowing the God of Israel. A point that many Jews reluctantly agree with, since they know that teaching the nations about the one true God their very mission and it is their explanation as to why the temple was destroyed. So that they can bring more converts. Who has converted more pagans than Jesus? Whose name is known throughout the world? Who ushered in the new covenant prophesied by the Prophet Jeremiah before the destruction of the second temple? And why have so many Jews been anointed “messiah” but keep failing in their mission over the course of the last 2000 years?
Dr Michael Brown would agree with Dr.Michael S.Heiser that Jesus was comparing Petros ( Peter) to Petra ( the Large Rock Formation) from Jesus 2nd temple period Biblical Judaism teachings: Not saying Peter is the literal "THIS ROCK " which would deny the Roman Catholic interpretation of Matthew 16. Yes ,You should read Dr.Michael Brown 's book and Trent recommending it is quite funny from Dr.Michael Brown views on some Roman Catholic interpretations of Jesus 2nd temple period Biblical Judaism.
@@davidjanbaz7728 well just like Trent, I don’t have to agree with everything an author endorses in order to appreciate their work on a particular subject. I can point to Protestant Matthew experts who would agree with the Catholic position, and Trent has an episode on this as well, they would just disagree that it has succession but agree that grammar points to Peter being the Rock. In the scholarly world people point to works from people that they disagree on all the time. This is not the slam dunk you think it is.
@@simplydanny that one Protestant scholar D. A. Carson may not be saying what you think as agreeing with the Roman Catholic interpretation. Your right many Protestants could agree with you against abortion and support General Christian arguments. This just shows Trent hasn't read Dr.Michael Brown or Dr.Michael S.Heiser very much as to their total 2nd temple Biblical Judaism from the Two Powers in Heaven Israelite theology that Jesus taught and from the theology of the Earliest Historical Christianity. But it is when you understand the Two Powers in Heaven Israelite theology that Rabbinic Judaism rejected in the 2nd century AD.
Yes, everyone here should watch the debates of Michael Brown with Jewish rabbis, he does an amazing job. The one with Rabbi Tovia is amazing. Though of course he’s Protestant and we’ll have points of disagreements, there’s still a lot that I have learned from him, especially how interpret the messianic prophecies and Jewish sources.
Your such a fool if i made a book and that book said 10 million people saw me turn led into gold 2k years ago according to your lodgic that means its not only true but that 10 million people witnessed it happen. I've got some land you need to buy
Hello, me again. I wanted to ask you a few questions about the Protoevangelium of James? Chapter 1v3 makes reference to the 'records' of genealogy. Does the Catholic Church have any ideas if this might be the same as Iddo? Or something expanded? Any help here would be appreciated as this is a major part of my apologetic with regard to the lost bloodline of David. Ergo, Jews today have no way to identify the Mashiach post destruction of the temple and all its record keeping. Thanks!
@@BiblicalApologetics By the way Sam Shamoun refuted Tovia Singer much stronger than Trent, and He has also refuted many Jewish rabbis very powerfully. You can check his channel , "Sam Shamoun"
Unrelated, but one thing that's always baffled me is the exclusivity of Jewish membership. A person born into Judaism can completely renounce their belief in God, rescind any theological obligations they have, heck even criticize the very structure of theism itself, and still be considered a Jew even if its just by ethnicity. However, the moment a Jew converts to Christianity, they are no longer regarded as Jewish. Not by ethnicity, not by their community, religious leaders, nothing. They apparently get fully disowned from their lineage. At this point, I have to wonder what is even the point of being Jewish? I ask that out of curiosity. How can a member fully attack, oppose, and mock their own religion that is the basis of their heritage be still considered Jewish, but one who converts to Christianity, still believes in the same God as their ancestors did, be fully excluded?
This is wrong. This is not true at all. A Jew will always be a Jew. A Jew who converts is an apostate Jew. They will always be a Jew. The community will disagree. People may disagree but that doesn't invalidate that they were born a jew. You should educate yourself more about Judaism.
I guess that's how it works in the synagogue of Satan. Satan couldn't care less if someone denounces God and becomes an athiest, buddhist, etc. because those worldviews don't actively work against him. But Jesus Christ does.
I studied that question & I have an answer for you. It seems Orthodox Jews erroneously believe that we believe God has a Partner(it is what they think we mean by the Trinity). Also the Rabbis are divided over wither or not Christianity constitutes Noachide Monotheism or avodah zarah(idolatry). Those who think we are NOT true idol worshippers believe it is permitted for Gentiles to believe God has a partner and still be counted Noachide Monotheists. However no Jew can believe that without being guilty of avodah zarah(idolatry or foreign worship). So in their reasoning an idol worshipper is no longer a Jew vs those other example where he is a bad Jew. "Denying" God makes you a bad Jew. False worship an ex Jew. That is their theological reasoning. Of course Jews who join the Catholic Church are still Jews by New Testament standards....just saying and we believe those standards are the correct ones.
@@tomasrocha6139 Depends there are some Frum Jews who believe Christians are avodah zarah (idol worshipers or star worshipers.) and not Noachide at all. But many believe Gentile Christians are Noachides but a Jew who confesses the Trinitiy is avodah zarah. It can be confusing.
Tovia always attacks christianity but ive never seen people like him actually defend judaism. It's like, they think if they can disprove christianity, it means judaism is somehow true. I've never even seen someone make an argument for judaism?
It’s because it’s an ethnic religion. It’s almost partly why jews are so powerful these days. Their religion just kept them and was cohesive for them(not that Judaism is actually is a religion that has salvation)
they are supremacists, and they dont want anyone being a part of their club except for themselves. they refer to us as cattle in their book. the whole point of his work is to attack Christ, just like his ancestors did.
I just think he's kinda hypocrite in his attacks to Christianity, he don't use the same amount of skepcism in Judaism like he does in Christianity. A lot of problems that can be found in Christianity (like authorships) are the same in Judaism
Regarding the bringing annointing after the burial, recall that they had to bring Jesus down and bury him before the Sabbath arrived. Jesus died at 3pm-ish, and Sabath was probably around 6-7 pm. They were also outside of the city on Golgotha when Jesus died. That gives them only at most 4 hours to get him bound and buried in the tomb. Not sure what exceptions to the Sabbath law requiring rest was for treating dead bodies, but It seems highly likely that this burial was itself rushed. That the women then go to annoint him properly early in the monring of the first day tells me they were held back because of the Sabbath law and were waiting until first light to be able to finish his burial as they thought he deserved.
That was my thought as well. Roman crucifixions would actually last way more than a few hours, but because Passover was just about to start they needed to “speed up” the dead aspect. It even states in the account what was happening. And if the trial and execution took place relatively quick, people probably wouldn’t have time to gather all the supplies and carry them around during the walk to Calvary. Even today’s Jews argue what constitutes ‘work on the Sabbath’ such as working the stove, walking with groceries, driving, etc. There’s even a giant cable running around a section of New York City so people have a ‘loophole’ to get some simple errands done outside the home. So yeah, not surprised it took the women a few days to get out there with the perfumes and oils.
Something I think is interesting is his argument that the story is contrived because "no one would go back to go anoint a body of someone that is already dead". He's arguing that it doesn't make any sense and "no one would do that so it must be contrived" but, if no one would do that then why would they use that detail as a plot device to begin with? He's saying it's a detail that isn't believable so it's not true so it must be a made up detail to get people to believe their false narrative. But problematically, if it's a detail no one would believe, then they wouldn't have used it as a plot device to get people to believe it.
The Rabbi makes an excellent case though in that assertion. The reason for anointing the body was to keep it from smelling/rotting. Well, if it has already sat about for 3 days, it has already begun to decompose. There would be no point to the anointing by then. It's obvious that the Gospel writers needed an excuse to place the women at the tomb, and this was it.
@@Charlotte_Marteli know this comment is late but haven't you considered the possibility that Mary had been grieving? Imagine Seeing Jesus the man Who up to this point had cured the blind, fed 5000 people, made paralyzed people walk, and was also one of you most closest friends. Die crucified (which at the time was one of the most cruel forms of execution). Most people would have been overcome with grief, perhaps thats why it to so long for her to finally annoint Him,
I am just beginning to read a book called "Salvation Is From The Jews", by Roy Shoeman. Shoeman is a Jewish Catholic who maintains that Catholicism could more accurately be called "Post-Messianic Judaism".
@darlameeks I contend had Paul's assertion that Gentiles did not have to be circumcised to now be part of the Jewish movement known as The Way; today there would be a sect of Judaism known as Jewish-Christians who accepted Jesus as the Messiah. They wouldn't have broken away from Judaism and face the wrath that Jews for Jesus or Jewish-Catholics face today. In fact, had Peter and not Paul been the "founder" of the Church, I believe the Catholic Church might not even exist today. Many people would be simply Jewish following Jesus.
About time someone did a video answering objections from Jewish rabbis. You should do more Trent. You should look to refute rabbi mizrahi as well. He says a lot of things that are not true and people have been convince of it P.S tent absolutely destroy the rabbi in his arguments.
I have been reading Rabbi Singer’s take on Christianity for several months now, and am an associate of Hebrew Catholic since 2012. I studied professionally through my archdiocese a good number of years, and do respond more in our Catholic spirit than argue. I have always had compassion for the Jews, especially in that my father taught us to never forget the Holocaust. He misinterprets or misunderstands, to the point one can walk away along the lines of ‘no good can come out of Nazareth’ to the same sentiment and position towards Christianity. The site sees Christianity as idolatry. Another Muslim came on sharing my concerns that there are Muslims who hear him out, that could lead to more harm of Christians, seeing that in Pakistan, Nigeria, and stabbings throughout the world. Reading in depth comments below support my observation in regards to the development of Judaism after Christ, and its interpretation of Scriptures. Likewise, it is notable Judaism has no catechism seeing how many different takes there are among the rabbis today. When reflecting on the Gospel of John and Christ’s response to the Jewish man who did not understand the meaning of the Bread of Life, His response was that God was not drawing him. I pray daily that Our Heavenly Father will draw the Jews to Christ.
10:31, the explanation to the rabbi’s question is in the account. Jesus was taken down at the beginning of the sabbath, or it least very shortly before it began. Anointing his body would have counted as work so they waited until the sabbath was over. They also had to wait until the end of the sabbath to get a hold of the herbs and spices since they didn’t know Jesus would be condemned to death until the procession of the cross (remember Pilate tried to have Jews agree to set Jesus free which failed. He killed him only to avoid a riot.) The Jews at the time took the sabbath incredibly seriously and even miracles were considered work. The women would have remained faithful to this.
Mary Magdalene must have been more familiar with Jewish laws than Rabbi Singer. [Shulchan Aruch394:3] _"One may go out to the cemetery and visit the dead until three days [after being placed in the sepulchral chamber], for perhaps he is still alive."_ [Shulchan Aruch394:3]
I think Tovia Singer’s heart is in the right place. I have actually spoken with him personally at one point. He is a kind man. But sometimes in his misguided efforts to “preserve Judaism” among Jews, he does go out on a limb when attempting to refute Christianity and a lot of times he will reach for a conclusion that is disingenuous. I’m glad to see that you have responded to some of his videos because he can make some good arguments if you’re not actually well read up on scripture. But his target audience are Jews in order to prevent their proselytization, which is why he doesn’t have to talk with the same level of expertise about the NT that well read atheists or Protestants use against other Christians. In his efforts, all he has to do is make quick point to discredit the NT and then most Jews will take his word about the NT for what it is.
Did you know that your version of what happened at the tomb with Mary magdalene, the other women and the disciples is exactly how it is recorded in the visions of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich in THE DOLORUS PASSION of JESUS CHRIST. It's a wonderful read ,most suited for the lenten period and especially the holy week.
This was a breath of fresh air. So many apologist channels will make hours of content going after Atheist and Islamic objections to Christ, but avoid mentioning that Jewish ones. Worse still, they treat suggestions to do so as tantamount to an invitation to deny the Holocaust.
Protestant apologist here again! But TRENT! I love your content and could binge it all day. Your videos have been the only highlight of my day sometimes and you seriously have some great work on your channel. Rabbi Singer unfortunately, I believe, has taken up argumentation like this even with the Messianic Jew Michael Brown and has had his argumentation destroyed concerning the prophecies of Jesus and his divinity. I’m glad you stepped on the boat of addressing Tovia. No one except for a few Christians, have stepped up to the plate to dismantle modern Judaism. So again, thank you Trent. Love you man, and hope you do more responses like this. -Wes
The problem with Trent's arguments is that they only work if you are already within the fairh, but to someone not in the faith they make very little sense.
Luckily more people are interested in the Bible. Once more people investigate the scriptures themselves they see there is something off between what is in the Bible and what is known as Christianity. But that’s if people really care. Most people are worrying about life I guess and don’t care too much to read these books which are not very interesting to most
One of the quickest and easiest ways to refute Rabbinic Judaism is with the prophecy found in the Old Testament book of Malachi 1:10-11 about how gentiles all over the world, from east to west, would worship the God of Israel during the messianic age. It creates all kinds of problems for the rabbis because they teach that once the messiah arrives, every Jew will own 2800 slaves and gentiles will flock to them for wisdom and guidance while they study the mysteries of the Torah and the universe and offer sacrifices in the newly built Temple. But Malachi's prophecy clearly states that God will reject the sacrifices of the Jews and will somehow accept the incense and pure sacrifice offered to Him by gentiles all over the world during that period of rejection. But how can gentiles have a knowledge of the God of Israel and Judaism and offer those things in their worship of Him when Jews have never evangelized them, especially not on a global scale? So where does that prophecy fit into the rabbis order of events? There's no room for it at all because it implies a mass apostasy or turning away on the part of the Jews and God's subqequent rejection of them. And the apostasy and rejection can't happen during the rabbis fantastical messianic timeline because they say that the messianic age will be ome of world peace where Jews are in total submission and obedience to the will of God. But that's the only possible time where Jews would have converted the world to the Torah, so it doesn't make any sense. But Christians know exactly what that prophecy in Malachi is referring to, and they knew it right from the very beginning. You can find it mentioned in many writings from the early Church, including in St. Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho the Jew. God has rejected the sacrifices of the Jews, which is why their Temple was obliterated and the Aaronic priesthood destroyed in 70 A.D., just as Christ prophecied 40 years earlier. And gentiles everywhere, from the rising of the sun to its setting, offer up incense and a pure sacrifice to the God of Israel because they have already been evangelized and converted to belief in Israel's king messiah, Jesus of Nazareth. The incense and pure sacrifice thay Malachi saw them offering all over the world is the Eucharist in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that happens on the altars of every Catholic Chruch in the world 365 dyas a year.. So Malachi 1:10-11 demolishes not only the false religion of Rabbinic Judaism but also Islam and Protestantism as well.
Baptist here.. trent, please debate rabbi tovia singer.. my suggestion for the thesis.. "Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of Israel." Even if you can't get tovia to debate you please invite Dr. Michael brown on your channel. I think it would be great to see you have a friendly discussion with Dr. Brown on messianic Christian Apologetics.
Does rabbi Singer applies the same strict level of scrutiny to the interpretation of the old testament narratives? Genesis, Noah, Abraham.,.... to name a few....I doubt it, if he did, he would not be a Rabbi.
The Gospels are the testimonies of four people about events they experienced, directly or indirectly. It is absurd to ask that four different testimonies be identical, because that would prove that they are concerted and therefore false. Our Catholic ancestors preserved four testimonies that are consistent, but certainly not identical.
Really? So if I and 3 of my friends are robbed, and all of our accounts of the robbers differ ("There was 1 robber, and he was ginger." "No, there were 2 robbers, and they had dark hair" etc), how seriously do you think the police will take our testimony?
In Isaiah 53:11, a few of our English translations have the following text with a footnote: “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied.” The footnote to the reading in the ESV says, “Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scroll he shall see light.” The ESV translates the received text “he will see” (יִרְאֶה yir’eh). But most English translations read against the received text and with three Dead Sea Scrolls (1QIsaa 1QIsab 4QIsad) and the Hebrew text of the Greek translator, all of which preserve the word “light” for what the Servant sees (“he will see light” יראה אור yir’eh ’ôr). Most textual critics and English translators have adopted the reading found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and therefore, have something like: “After his anguish, he will see light and be satisfied” (CSB). The received text probably omitted accidentally the word “light” because the word “will see” in Hebrew is similar to it and the omission can be explained as accidental. The metaphor “to see light” refers to having life. In Job 3:16, Job asks why he was not hidden like a miscarried child or like infants who did not see light. In Job 33:28, 30, Elihu envisions God as the one who redeems one’s soul from the pit and one’s life then can see light. In Isaiah 53, the servant died vicariously and was buried in a tomb. In Isaiah 53:11, “seeing light” refers to the resurrection of the Servant from the dead because of his work. He will see light and be satisfied in his knowledge, that is, his obedience in covenant relationship with the Lord. As a result, the Lord’s righteous Servant will now justify the many. The resurrection @Nc Cognito Many commentators find this reading too difficult and our translations have glossed over the difficulties in the actual text. But one need not despair. Many textual critics and commentators have discerned that the original text has been preserved in the Septuagint or the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, since that version has “to death” (εἰς θάνατον), which probably translated a Hebrew text having “to death” (לַמָּוֶת lammaweth). There is only one letter (ת) difference between this reading and the received text, and it is probable that the Greek translation suggests a different and more original Hebrew text yielding the meaning: “He was cut off from the land of the living, because of the transgression of my people he was stricken to death.” Thus, the prophecy of Isaiah 53:8 originally predicted that the Servant would be stricken to death. He would die vicariously for his people’s transgressions, and the New Testament authors appear to have read accordingly the Song in relation to Jesus Christ’s work on the cross. In 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul notes that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures. There is no Old Testament passage that details this substitutionary death more than Isaiah 53. In Isaiah 53:9, several of our English translations have: “And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death” (ESV; cf. NIV). But the NRSV along with several others has: “They made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich.” The received text has “in his deaths” (בְּמֹתָיו bəmōthayw), which the later Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions all simplified to “in his death,” and some of our modern English translations followed suit. But the text is better preserved in 1QIsaa (the Great Isaiah Scroll) which has the reading “his hill” or “his tomb” (בומתו bômtô from בֹּ֫מֶת bōmeth). Therefore, with most commentators and translations, Isaiah 53:9 predicted that the Servant’s body would be laid in a tomb. It was no minor detail to the gospel writers to record that Jesus’ body be buried in a tomb, and Matthew even highlights that Joseph of Arimathea was a rich man (cf. Matt 27:57ff). In Isaiah 53:11, a few of our English translations have the following text with a footnote: “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied.” The footnote to the reading in the ESV says, “Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scroll he shall see light.” The ESV translates the received text “he will see” (יִרְאֶה yir’eh). But most English translations read against the received text and with three Dead Sea Scrolls (1QIsaa 1QIsab 4QIsad) and the Hebrew text of the Greek translator, all of which preserve the word “light” for what the Servant sees (“he will see light” יראה אור yir’eh ’ôr). Most textual critics and English translators have adopted the reading found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and therefore, have something like: “After his anguish, he will see light and be satisfied” (CSB). The received text probably omitted accidentally the word “light” because the word “will see” in Hebrew is similar to it and the omission can be explained as accidental. The metaphor “to see light” refers to having life. In Job 3:16, Job asks why he was not hidden like a miscarried child or like infants who did not see light. In Job 33:28, 30, Elihu envisions God as the one who redeems one’s soul from the pit and one’s life then can see light. In Isaiah 53, the servant died vicariously and was buried in a tomb. In Isaiah 53:11, “seeing light” refers to the resurrection of the Servant from the dead because of his work. He will see light and be satisfied in his knowledge, that is, his obedience in covenant relationship with the Lord. As a result, the Lord’s righteous Servant will now justify the many. The resurrection shows the vindication of the servant and becomes the ground for the justification of the many. This logic appears to be Paul’s own in Romans 4:24-25 where he interprets Christ’s death for our transgressions and his resurrection for our justification. textandcanon.org/recovering-the-resurrection-textual-criticism-and-easter/#:~:text=At%20end%20of%20Isaiah%2053,my%20people%E2%80%9D%20(%20ESV%2
LOL. Tovia is still up to his old tricks I see. I remember the first time Dr. Michael Brown debated Tovia in 1989. Dr. Brown was ambushed by sneaky Tovia who pretended he sincerely wanted to hear Mike's perspective on Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. Dr. Michael Brown is a Jewish believer in Jesus who holds a PhD from NYU in ancient near eastern languages. When Mike got to the meeting he suddenly found out it was a set up where Tovia arrogantly thought he would catch Dr. Brown off guard and destroy him, so the entire debate was recorded. THE OPPOSITE happend instead. Mike so completely DEMOLISHED Tovia in that debate that Tovia being the coward he is, has still refused to this day, to debate Mike. Mike has since debated other Rabbis (e.g. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach) but the other Rabbis Mike debates have integrity (Mike is friends with some of them). I highly recommend any of the books Dr. Brown has written (I studied under him 34 yrs ago) - especially on apologetics.
@@Mark4Jesus I may actually have a recording of it on cassette, buried in the attic somewhere. I think Mike would probably have a recording of it. You should send his ministry an email and ask him...
From Band of Brothers: Lt. Ronald Spiers: "The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a soldier is supposed to function: without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All war depends upon it.” DISCIPLE'S VERSION "The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead (to this world). The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a disciple is supposed to function: with mercy, with compassion, without remorse. All preaching depends upon it."
If by any chance that "rabbi" never accepts Jesus before death. He is going to be in for a rude awakening when he sees Jesus during the 2nd resurrection 😅
On the idea of the empty tomb as a plot device, it makes no sense. You'd just have Jesus appear to the disciples, then they would go to the tomb to see if he's still there. Also, assume Singer is right that announcing a body is only so it won't smell. That may be a technical reason, but rituals around death are emotional, too. We bury the dead to prevent disease, but burial is also very symbolic and meaningful.
“He was despised and rejected- a man of sorrows, acquainted with deepest grief. We turned our backs on him and looked the other way. He was despised, and we did not care. Yet it was our weaknesses he carried; it was our sorrows that weighed him down. And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God, a punishment for his own sins! But he was pierced for our rebellion, crushed for our sins. He was beaten so we could be whole. He was whipped so we could be healed. All of us, like sheep, have strayed away. We have left God’s paths to follow our own. Yet the Lord laid on him the sins of us all. He was oppressed and treated harshly, yet he never said a word. He was led like a lamb to the slaughter. And as a sheep is silent before the shearers, he did not open his mouth. Unjustly condemned, he was led away. No one cared that he died without descendants, that his life was cut short in midstream. But he was struck down for the rebellion of my people. He had done no wrong and had never deceived anyone. But he was buried like a criminal; he was put in a rich man’s grave. But it was the Lord’s good plan to crush him and cause him grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have many descendants. He will enjoy a long life, and the Lord’s good plan will prosper in his hands. When he sees all that is accomplished by his anguish, he will be satisfied. And because of his experience, my righteous servant will make it possible for many to be counted righteous, for he will bear all their sins. I will give him the honors of a victorious soldier, because he exposed himself to death. He was counted among the rebels. He bore the sins of many and interceded for rebels.” Isaiah 53:3-12 NLT This was written around 700 years before Jesus came into the earth, yet it describes His life perfectly. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16 God loves you so much and showed that by sending His Son to die for us so that we may inherit eternal life. We deserve judgement but He gave us heaven through faith in Jesus. He took the punishment we deserved, and by putting our faith in Him we can be saved. The Key To Eternal Life: ruclips.net/video/uZdv-TtiMkg/видео.html For evidence for Christianity and answered questions, check out ruclips.net/user/drcraigvideos and ruclips.net/user/CrossExamined because if Jesus really rose from the dead it is the most important fact ever!
This is a risky subject due to a lot of bad faith insults hurled at those that make it. Great job Trent for tackling it and being brave enough to do so.
In his dialogue with German reformed theologian Jürgen Moltmann, Pinchas Lapide says: "On page 139 of his book 'The Church in the Power of the Spirit' (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1977) it says: 'Through his crucifixion Christ has become the Saviour of the Gentiles. But in his parousia he will also manifest himself as Israel's Messiah.' I find this sentence an acceptable formula of reconciliation."
Every sect is tribal. Rabbi Singer will ignore the hundreds of contradictions in the Hebrew Bible. Christians will ignore the contradictions in the New Testament. Ultimately, it's a question of faith. I believe Jesus is God. I believe Jesus is resurrected. I don't KNOW. I have to take it on faith, as we all do.
Always find it confusing that the Jews can believe that God talked to Moses through a burning bush, but the resurrection of our lord and savior Jesus Christ is just a road to far.
We must take care to avoid actual or alleged antisemitism. Remember, criticising the views of Jews is not antisemitism and neither is to criticise Israel or its government or policies. I disagree with Mr Singer, but I do not hate him. Disagreement is not hatred.
@@collectiveconsciousness5314 One is not an apostate if he never joined the religion. Using your logic, Muslims could claim that you and everyone on this channel are apostates to Islam and should be subject to its penalties. The Rabbi makes excellent points. I just wish that he would apply his critical eye to the Hebrew scriptures which have as much evidence to support their supernatural claims as the NT does.
A video of yours I actually enjoy. I’m all for critiquing other religions, regardless of Vatican II. Enough Christians have been under-attack and I feel like we should all be mindful before we criticize other Christians. I really enjoy that you’re utilizing your energy in this video to show why Christianity is the answer to salvation ✝️✝️🕊️
The Counsel of Trent is always great. It seems most rabbis are accepting that Jesus is the temple by not showing interest in its re-construction. By the resurrection, the temple had actually been rebuilt.
Hey Trent, in regards to the women returning to the Tomb to anoint the body when Jesus was already in His final resting place... according to an ancient Jewish manuscript during the time of Jesus (Massekhet Semaḥot 8:1), the body of the deceased had to be inspected for 3 days…which would be a plausible explanation as to why the women returned to the tomb. It was a requirement. That's my short response. Now for another logical perspective: Since a crucified person was still under the custody of the Roman government, relatives or friends of the now deceased person could not just simply take down the body once that person died. They would need permission. For this reason, Joseph of Arimathea had to travel to wherever Pilate was in order to ask for his consent to bring down the body of Jesus. There are two reasons to want to promptly bring down a body from a hanging cross (as you know very well). 1 - Jewish law forbade a hanging body overnight because it would bring upon a curse. 2 - The Sabbath was quickly approaching. Rabbi Tovia suggests that Joseph of Arimathea was a fictional character but regardless if he was real or not, somebody had to take Jesus down from the cross. That much would only seem obvious. So allow me to continue to refer to that person as Joseph of Arimathea. Moving forward... Jesus died around 3 PM and since the Sabbath was approaching quickly, Joseph was against the clock. He not only had to make a time consuming journey to parlay with Pilate he also had to hurry back to the Cross which would take up more of his time. After having exhausted precious time to make it to Pilate and back to the Cross, the time consuming process of taking down his body could then begin. Under normal circumstances the body would have been taken to a place to be prepared for burial, according to Tovia's explanation and reasoning. However, the passage gives the impression that Joseph wrapped Jesus' body there at the cross, although this may not necessarily have to be true. This would seem to be the case since time was limited. The main objective was to get Jesus down from the cross and to his final resting place in a timely fashion in order to make it indoors for the Sabbath. The proper formalities of cleaning, cleansing, and anointing the body would have to wait. Given the situation, the most you would want to do is at least prepare the body from a decaying smell so when you go back to clean, cleans, and anoint the body, the odor would be somewhat masked. But someone reading this may still wonder as to why go back to clean, cleans, and anoint the body if he is already in the tomb. I'm getting to that... Jesus didn't die by a simple wound, He died just before His body was ravaged beyond all recognition. If He died of a simple stab wound, the people caring for His body would have no problem cleaning up his puncture wound when he was taken down from the Cross before wrapping up His body. However, as it was, Jesus' ravaged body would have needed a lot of love and attention before wrapping Him up. That's what any loving person would do for those who they love. But...the clock is ticking and they have to be indoors by sunset. The last thing anyone would want is to leave a loved one in their final resting place in their ravaged state. It would only seem logical that they would want to go back and give the body the proper love and attention in order to leave the body in its cleansed and anointed state for its final resting place. Now to better explain my first short response: In ancient rabbinic Judaism, there was a difference in opinion amongst different schools of thought regarding when the soul actually departed the body. In my speculation, perhaps this aided in the reasoning of the Massekhet Semaḥot 8:1 that the body could rise back to life because of past Jewish accounts of the dead resuscitating after having died. According to the Massekhet Semaḥot 8:1, there was a custom of inspecting the dead to make certain that death had actually occurred. This observance occurred for three days (The Jewish Law Annual, Volume 12, page 101). See also: www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/ancient-burial-practices
@@davidjanbaz7728 I mean, that's the claim of any self respecting religion. Why would any faith tradition say it deserved to exist if it didn't believe it was THE right one? Then you get into "all paths lead to God" and spiritualism New-age stuff.
Who? Can you name one scientist speaking against our lady's appearance? Can you name a single skeptic of the miracle of the sun at Fatima without looking up news articles? You have preconceptions about the relationship between science and miracles, and are lost to bias. @@Charlotte_Martel
There are contradictions in small details for the same events in the Old Testament as well. That is to be expected when different people are writing about the same events. People remember things differently, they remember specific details differently… that actually points toward the truth of the gospels. If they were exactly the same in every detail it would point toward a fraudulent gospel. Ask any detective who interviews multiple witnesses. If they are all giving the exact same details, it points toward a made-up story. People remember real events a little differently.
Rabbinical Judaism just lends itself to this sort of "argumentation," pointing out technicalities that can just as easily be applied to the OT, just for the sake of attempting to point out a contradiction, scratch his chin, hum, and feel like a *really* intelligent little midwit. It's basically just fart-huffing in religious form.
@@raphaelloferrer220 There's a problem with this because early Rabbis believed isaiah 53 is messianic and second isaiah 53 talks about a singular servant who is rejected by Israel. And the whole point of isaiah 53 is that the servant will redeem his people through his wounds and death
@@EmberBright2077 - not really. I think it's a fair analogy. Protestants look through the lens of scripture with an anti-Catholic bias built in. I should know, I was an evangelical Protestant for 40 years. They read John Chapter 6 and don't see the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
May Rabbi Tovia Singer find the Truth so that, at last, he can declare willfully, Baruch Haba B’shem ADONAI! Shalom Rabbi! Thanks Trent, GOD bless you always, all of you in the family!
I think some good context for this, speaking as an orthodox jew. Is 1) this isn't even remotely a main argument or even an important argument that tovia makes. This is just one discussion that came up in a podcast, im not sure what even triggered it but its really not important to orthodox Jews if jesus even lived or not. Doesn't matter or change anything anyway for us. 2) he is responding to/speaking to evangelical Christians who believe in "scripture alone"(i don't know the latin term exactly so i didn't want to try and err) but yea hes not talking to catholics. And the reason is theres a very specific denomination of Christians who target jews, and they're quite cultish about it, firstly they target the "non knowledgeable" jews. Ive literally had one of these missionaries stop me on the street as he was handing out fliers, and ask me where the less religious jews live (he didn't want to debate me or talk to me, a frum yid with a kippa walking to shul on shabbos. He wanted the reform jews😅). So Tovia responds to them and they, unlike catholics, don't have the benefit of the catholic traditions or non literal interpretations, and other responses afforded to catholics. Also lets be honest generally speaking catholics are alot smarter or so ive come to realize watching this channel, listening to knowles and walsh, and pints with aquinas and his different guests, and listening to and reading books by Ed Feser.
Tovia Singer is weirdly often reformationist-anti-catholic in his approach to anti-Christian polemics. He will often maintain a pro-protestant anti-Catholic stance in the establishment of his Christian adversary, before refuting the Christian argument. It is bizzare.
It was recommended Rabbi Singer would instruct teaching of the Torah. Instead this site spinned distortion , misrepresentations, false witness along with the regulars with some saying offensive remarks about Christ and Christianity. Looks like ancient rabbis shut the door on Christ a long time ago.
The good Rabbi acknowledges it and everyone know Sid Roth edited the video. The good Rabbi teaches Gd and His Holy Eternal Torah, Brown teaches regurgitated Greco Roman myths.
This rabbi is addressing messianic jews who are actively prosleytzing in Israel, they even approach jews at the Wall and they are having some success He sounds angry at times but I kinda empathize with him. When we made pilgrimage to Israel one of the bishops told our group that the popes have instructed against prosletzying in Israel, they just look after holy sites and the 80000 Latin/Maronite/Hebrew/Armenian and Greek Catholics who are Israeli citizens. If jews approach them to discuss the faith, that's different, there are about 800 Hebrew-catholics in Israel.
I studied Judaism and most of those who claim to be Jews, are not Jews to begin with. First off a lot of them don't even believe in God let alone follow his commands, they just follow the traditions and the holidays. Most of these people are just atheists and agnostics claiming a false identity. It's like a person claiming 'im a Christian' or 'im a Muslim but if then they say they 'don't believe in God' and they don't even at least try to follow the commands, well obviously despite this person's claim they are not what they say they are. This is also the same logic you see the transgenders and the furries using... if a girl was born as a girl she cannot claim she is a man, that's just a lie and a fantasy trying to be projected into real life. Then for the furries, they obviously dress up in fur suits and claim they identify as an animal, well no that's also a lie and a fantasy trying to be projected into real life.
That’s because you can’t actually dismiss their claims using your own reason and ability so you do what most Christian’s do and fall back on using Bible rhetoric. Just reveals an absolute misunderstanding and lack of knowledge about your own belief system.
@Nahmanides1 "Rabbi" Singer uses straight up lies and provable falsehoods in order to push an anti-Christ agenda. One example is where he talks about the authenticity of the New Testament. He claims that the Gospel of John was written after the destruction of the Temple. A 2 second Google search can confirm that the apostle Paul, who died prior to the destruction of the temple, quoted the Gospel of John in his writings. Tovia Singer preys, like a filthy Jew, on the ignorance of Christians that don't know their history. He also uses HIMSELF as an appeal to authority of the meaning of Hebrew words despite the fact that a quick internet search can find linguistic experts who disagree with him. So yes, he is of the Synagogue of Satan.
@@JudasMaccabeus1 That verse means to say that most of these self-proclaimed Jews are not Jews, they are just atheists and agnostics pretending to be Jews by following the traditions and the holidays, as if that justifies their false title. You'd be surprised how many of them don't even believe in God for a start let alone follow God's word. Could someone be a Christian or a Muslim simply by following the traditions and holidays? no. If you don't believe in God you can't then claim to be a Christian, a Jew, or a Muslim.
Roy Shoeman did a video series entitled, "What is Judaism?" In part "VII Kabbalah and Hasidism" at around 1:29:00 he discusses Jewish beliefs on the "emanations" of God, the "Ein Sof". He's not the first Jew I've heard discuss these things. One for Israel Ministry recently released a video called, "A Jewish Defense of the Trinity - The Case for Messiah". There they quoted from Benjamin Sommer's, "The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel". Both videos are great introductions to the topic.
Re the objection about anointing a body after multiple days of burial: I am reminded of My Girl where McCauley Culkin's character is dead and at the wake the protagonist is hysterical saying that he needs his glasses, he can't see without his glasses. The script writers were trying to evoke a very human reaction to the death of a loved one, where rational thought could be overridden by emotion. Bringing spices to anoint could've have easily been as much an emotional response "we have to do this bc this is how it is done," as a mental faux pas oops. It's still a reasonably understandable act on the part of the women
Why don't you guys believe G-d will just forgive transgressions via repentance as is stated all over the Hebrew scriptures? Do you think he is incapable of this?
God can but chooses to remove all doubt. Is God evil for doing this? Or generous? Magnanimous? Like the heroic IDF soldiers who fight for the free world while many liberals are ungrateful? I could care less about Israel if I weren't Christian lol. Am Israel Chai. God bless America god bless Israel Merry Christmas Hanukkah Kwanzaa and New Year!
They don't just hate the New Testament, they hate the Old Testament and covenant as well because God didn't allow them to do whatever they wanted and always punished them for their crimes.
The people chosen by God for the nations continue to reject Him. God Himself came and created a bond between Jews and Gentiles - what we now call the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Conversions continue to happen even today. We(The Catholic Church) are the new Israel. Chosen for the nations. Let us proclaim the Light to the nations. Jesus is God.
Part of Singer’s implicit assurance that diverging Gospel accounts “rule out” taking them seriously is that he holds to Rabbinic assumptions regarding Torah and it’s transmission and supposed self-accounting - and then assumes New Testament works (or Quran or Vedic lit etc), “must” also assume the same “dictated directly to a prophet by God” matrices of assumptions and FAIL at meeting his fundamentalist Orthodox Jewish “standards”, Historical literary conventions be damned…including historical context of Torah.
In addition he harbors many assumptions regarding New Testament works (and Christian history) from the 80s and 90s at best; un-updated, un-revised. I think it’s related to the self-assurance above, as he doesn’t seem to think it necessary to address any new research or scholarship; if it’s from “Christians”, it’s just reactionary apologetics, not Orthodox, TORAH TRUE scholarship - regardless of the nature of academic scholarship; you can meet this in fundamentalist Christians as well.
The nature of “The Messiah” is not shared between Christians and Jews now; historic diversity of expectations among Jewish groups regarding the Messiah is evidenced in the Gospels themselves. Singer assumes orthodox rabbinic Jewish expectations of later late-ancient and Medieval codification, in no small part formulated in response to Christianity. Also scholars such as Lapide or Neusner who are simply “Jewish” and not Orthodox Jews are of little account to Boteach or Singer.
Finally, the great amount of Jewish responses to Christianity aren’t intended for Christians, they’re intended for mostly-unaffiliated Jews to dissuade THEM from Evangelical Protestant missionary efforts. Catholics and other Christians are not the intended viewing audience; it’s foremost about “keeping Jews Jewish”, a kind of “war of love for Jewish souls”, where “all is fair in love and war”, objectivity regarding (or comprehensive account of), 1st Century Roman Palestine contexts and history since, is often a casualty.
I know you were talking about something else with the Testament of Simeon... the two messiah belief, but... man that got me thinking. It sounds a lot like John the Baptist and Jesus. Wouldn't John be from the tribe of Levi? I'm not saying John the Baptist was a priest, but he does seem to anoint Jesus, though with water instead of oil in the Jordan. That kinda just blew my mind a little bit! Also, I'm not saying John was a messiah either, but his mission was so tied to that of the messiah, that it seems to mesh well with the Testament of Simeon... at least this portion that you put up that I may be taking completely out of context.
It's pretty clear that the way some of the Gospels were written by starting with John the Baptist were addressing the two Messiahs theory. When John the Baptist then says that he is not the Messiah, it puts the theory to rest, but it does seem to be in the conscience of the authors to address.
Hi everyone. I just want to say I'm very sorry about the confusion with today's episode.
First it was scheduled incorrectly for Friday. Then, in trying to game the algorithm I tried to reupload it earlier today but realized I uploaded the wrong file. Now, I see I don't have the finished file but the rougher uploaded one still works so I thought I'd share it to at least have something for Easter Monday.
On a related note, I'll be hiring a digital assistant (5-10 hours per week) soon to hopefully that will keep things running smoother. If you would like to help me with the Counsel of Trent and my other projects, keep an eye out for a link soon to apply.
And once again, I'm sorry for the haphazard upload of today's episode.
When tovia singer acts like James white 🤔
When Eastern orthodox argue like protestants.
I was wondering what had happened Friday. Saw it pop up in my feed and went, “yay! New Trent episode!” And then five minutes later it wasn’t there anymore.
I figured either 1) you goofed the episode release or 2) the video got flagged for “hate speech” or something. 🤔 glad it was just a technical issue 😇
You are an uneducated liar who follows the bible, a book written by uneducated men who married children within their own bloodlines and believed in witchery.....that's your source.... 🤣 Such dishonesty
...
Write the equivalent book for Jews, including Inquisition.
I remember once objecting (respectully) to a fairly malicious anti-Catholic comment regarding Mary's virginity on Tovia Singer's channel, and as a reply I got "why do you hate us Jews"? It's a charming environment.
Remind me again, who else likens any form of criticism to hatred?
Oh yeah, atheists...
they are the only nobody is allowed to critisize. they never mention the h0Iodom0r because yagoda, marx, and lenin were all part of that cult. one of them even founded the church of satan, which confirms rev3:9
Victimhood is their true religion.
They will punch you and ask why you persecute their fists.
@@ironymatt and Catholics.
I'm happy to see Catholic apologists refute anti-christian rabbis. Well done, Trent.
In Isaiah 53:11, a few of our English translations have the following text with a footnote: “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied.” The footnote to the reading in the ESV says, “Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scroll he shall see light.” The ESV translates the received text “he will see” (יִרְאֶה yir’eh). But most English translations read against the received text and with three Dead Sea Scrolls (1QIsaa 1QIsab 4QIsad) and the Hebrew text of the Greek translator, all of which preserve the word “light” for what the Servant sees (“he will see light” יראה אור yir’eh ’ôr). Most textual critics and English translators have adopted the reading found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and therefore, have something like: “After his anguish, he will see light and be satisfied” (CSB). The received text probably omitted accidentally the word “light” because the word “will see” in Hebrew is similar to it and the omission can be explained as accidental.
The metaphor “to see light” refers to having life. In Job 3:16, Job asks why he was not hidden like a miscarried child or like infants who did not see light. In Job 33:28, 30, Elihu envisions God as the one who redeems one’s soul from the pit and one’s life then can see light. In Isaiah 53, the servant died vicariously and was buried in a tomb. In Isaiah 53:11, “seeing light” refers to the resurrection of the Servant from the dead because of his work. He will see light and be satisfied in his knowledge, that is, his obedience in covenant relationship with the Lord. As a result, the Lord’s righteous Servant will now justify the many. The resurrection
@Nc Cognito Many commentators find this reading too difficult and our translations have glossed over the difficulties in the actual text. But one need not despair. Many textual critics and commentators have discerned that the original text has been preserved in the Septuagint or the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, since that version has “to death” (εἰς θάνατον), which probably translated a Hebrew text having “to death” (לַמָּוֶת lammaweth). There is only one letter (ת) difference between this reading and the received text, and it is probable that the Greek translation suggests a different and more original Hebrew text yielding the meaning: “He was cut off from the land of the living, because of the transgression of my people he was stricken to death.”
Thus, the prophecy of Isaiah 53:8 originally predicted that the Servant would be stricken to death. He would die vicariously for his people’s transgressions, and the New Testament authors appear to have read accordingly the Song in relation to Jesus Christ’s work on the cross. In 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul notes that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures. There is no Old Testament passage that details this substitutionary death more than Isaiah 53.
In Isaiah 53:9, several of our English translations have: “And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death” (ESV; cf. NIV). But the NRSV along with several others has: “They made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich.” The received text has “in his deaths” (בְּמֹתָיו bəmōthayw), which the later Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions all simplified to “in his death,” and some of our modern English translations followed suit. But the text is better preserved in 1QIsaa (the Great Isaiah Scroll) which has the reading “his hill” or “his tomb” (בומתו bômtô from בֹּ֫מֶת bōmeth).
Therefore, with most commentators and translations, Isaiah 53:9 predicted that the Servant’s body would be laid in a tomb. It was no minor detail to the gospel writers to record that Jesus’ body be buried in a tomb, and Matthew even highlights that Joseph of Arimathea was a rich man (cf. Matt 27:57ff).
In Isaiah 53:11, a few of our English translations have the following text with a footnote: “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied.” The footnote to the reading in the ESV says, “Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scroll he shall see light.” The ESV translates the received text “he will see” (יִרְאֶה yir’eh). But most English translations read against the received text and with three Dead Sea Scrolls (1QIsaa 1QIsab 4QIsad) and the Hebrew text of the Greek translator, all of which preserve the word “light” for what the Servant sees (“he will see light” יראה אור yir’eh ’ôr). Most textual critics and English translators have adopted the reading found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and therefore, have something like: “After his anguish, he will see light and be satisfied” (CSB). The received text probably omitted accidentally the word “light” because the word “will see” in Hebrew is similar to it and the omission can be explained as accidental.
The metaphor “to see light” refers to having life. In Job 3:16, Job asks why he was not hidden like a miscarried child or like infants who did not see light. In Job 33:28, 30, Elihu envisions God as the one who redeems one’s soul from the pit and one’s life then can see light. In Isaiah 53, the servant died vicariously and was buried in a tomb. In Isaiah 53:11, “seeing light” refers to the resurrection of the Servant from the dead because of his work. He will see light and be satisfied in his knowledge, that is, his obedience in covenant relationship with the Lord. As a result, the Lord’s righteous Servant will now justify the many. The resurrection shows the vindication of the servant and becomes the ground for the justification of the many.
This logic appears to be Paul’s own in Romans 4:24-25 where he interprets Christ’s death for our transgressions and his resurrection for our justification.
textandcanon.org/recovering-the-resurrection-textual-criticism-and-easter/#:~:text=At%20end%20of%20Isaiah%2053,my%20people%E2%80%9D%20(%20ESV%2
All rabbis in the Talmudic faith are anti-Christian.
Anti-Chistian Rabbis? Why not just say Rabbis?
Excellent to see that you've broken free of the curse that has befallen these people since 70 A.D.
May the Lord keep you strong, you no doubt stood to lose a lot when choosing him over your tribe.
@@elgatofelix8917 Rabbi is a Hebrew word for Teacher, usually in a religious context. There can be rabbis who don't attack Christians, i.e. a teacher who isn't anti-Christian. A Hebrew speaker referring to their teacher doesn't outright mean they are against Christians.
With all due respect to rabbis everywhere, the last rabbi whom I will accept as my rabbi, died in the first century A.D. on a cross.
Source?
@@EvilXtianity Matt 23 vs 8-11 "But you, do not be called 'Rabbi'; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are all brethren. Jesus was called “rabbi” in Matthew 26:25, 49; Mark 9:5, 11:21, 14:45; John 1:38, 49, 2:2, 4:31, 6:25, 9:2, 11:8). The word “rabbi,” as John informs us, is translated “teacher” (John 1:38)
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker
But Jesus is a fictional character.
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker
_"Matt 23 vs 8-11 "But you, do not be called 'Rabbi'..."_
You know none of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus, right?
More nonsense from Matthew-
Matthew claims fulfillment of a prophecy that was never made-
Matthew 2:23
"And he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene."
Jesus is not called Emmanuel in any verse in the New Testament nor was he born of a virgin as prophesied in Isaiah 7:14.
Matthew 1:23
"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel."
Jesus falsely prophesies that the high priest would see his second coming.
Matthew 26:64
"I say to all of you; from now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the“Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” clouds of heaven.”
Matthew claims God is three:
"Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit". (Matthew 28:19)
God states that he is one:
"The LORD is one."
(Deuteronomy 6:4)
Matthew claims 14 generations from David to Jesus.
1st and 2nd Kings states there were 20 generations.
Jesus told his disciples that they would not die before his second coming:
"There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom".
(Matthew 16:28)
@@SaintCharbelMiracleworker
If you have evidence that the Bible figure known as Jesus existed, provide it.
However, it is an absolute fact that there is literally no contemporaneous evidence that Jesus ever existed.
Paul made up the Jesus fiction in 48 AD after the Daniel 9:25 prophesy failed to fulfill.
Shouldn't we expect that if God was walking around town for thirty years that the locals would have noticed at the time?
Fun fact: none of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus.
Does Rabbi Tovia Singer genuinely believe that the reason Christians bring up the women at the tomb is that we argue that you should just believe all women?
No, Tovia Singer is unfortunately really really good at purposefully strawmanning arguments. He's the Jewish James White
@@carstontoedter1333 Yeah, I've only seen some content from him but he's a very smart man, he's definitely not making that shallow of an argument out of ignorance.
@@carstontoedter1333 My favourite part of Tovia's strawmanning is when he claims to be steelmanning.
@@billyhw99 yeah I'd almost say he's worse than JW Became of what you said about his steelmanning claims and he won't debate anyone, at least not since Brown spanked him over a decade ago lol
@@carstontoedter1333 low praise indeed!
As a Protestant, I very much admire the simple clarity and effectiveness of Trent's responses. While I am not a Catholic myself, I very much see the value that you bring to our faith in general. God Bless!
Maybe you should convert to the original Christian Church?
God Bless.
I hope you continue watching and it brings you home with us one day, brother!
As Catholic I invite you to read and learn the Catholic faith since the Protestant religion was branched from the RCC the only church founded by Christ himself not by man. God bless you!!🙏🕊️
@@brianw.5230 maybe catholics can remove some of the additions made post biblical era and remove the papal system
@@irisfarrell5338 i invite you to show me where the Bible says pray to Mary
Judaism has been in shambles ever since the destruction of the second temple. Once they wrote the Talmud it wasn't even the same religion anymore
Exactly. Catholicism carried on the sacrificial nature of Judaism. Post-Temple Judaism dropped the sacrificial nature completely by historical necessity. Modern Judaism is an heretical offshoot of Old Testament Judaism.
It wasnt the same religion as soon as Christ came and fulfilled it. Really, modern judaism is nothing at all the Israel if the Bible, which was really the proto Church basically.
Exactly
@@hamie7624 To say Christ fulfilled Judaism is to say Christianity is not a radically different religion from Judaism. Catholicism carries on and fulfills the sacrificial nature of Temple Judaism and so much more. So while it wasn't exactly the same after Christ, it was still VERY similar after Christ in the form of Christianity.
@@tonyl3762 Christ DID fulfill "Judaism". (In quotes because it wasn't really Judaism, which is a man made religion that came after Christ.) The Church is the true continuation and fulfillment of Israel, the People of God in the old testament. The whole point of it was to prepare the world for the Savior, and that purpose was fulfilled.
His psychosis theory can literally explain away every supernatural experience in the Tanakh.
That was my immediate thought.
Except prophecy and public revelations like Sinai which an entire nation saw.
Tobia Singer is correct. There should have been 3200 mega pixel camera to record the event and they should be identical in all the Gospels in 2000 years ago.
I feel sorry for his followers listening to his songs.
Songs?
If it was just the topic rabbi singer expressed which is a valid argument, Jesus has enormous hurddles to overcome to be even concidered for the part of "the messiah" the most damiging argument against him is his connection to the tribe of Judah if the geneologies written by Mathew and Luke are Josephs NOT Jesus. So basicly the geneologies written in the NT are irrelevant.
Singer is right, there is contradiction there
@@avrahamisaacs2593
One genealogy is Jesus’s bloodline through Mary, and the other is the line leading to Jesus’s legal status as a foster son of Joseph. That’s why there are two genealogies for him in the New Testament.
Really glad to see a Christian (especially a Catholic) responding to this without worrying about.... backlash.
As a Protestant, I really enjoy Trent’s channel a lot. Truly great material here! These conversations are so important to have, and hopefully we can bring more to Christ by being well-equipped with answers! Praise God, for Christ has risen!
Rabbi Singer is easy to refute, but I will take this. And honestly, Jews DO argue like atheists. They do. I was part of that world before. My rabbi’s motto was “question everything, even God”. So yeah, this is better than nothing. I am happy to finally see this video. Jews for Judaism has more tough stances and would like to see Trent tackle some of those.
I agree especially the episode did paul invent Christianity that would be a good episode to go over.
"question everything, even God"
Red flag much? Lol.
@@__Man_ he’s not that good either. Trent is the best apologist out there. Truly, the finest.
@@AveChristusRex there’s a lot of nuance to it. I just don’t think typing it out on RUclips will help. You have to really learn jewish thought to understand their point a bit. Diving into actual religious Judaism is a rabbit hole and it’s worth exploring. I feel like it actually helped me come back to Catholicism and ask the right questions. It was how I was able to finally learn actual catholicism. I owe a lot to them, they helped me really understand the faith fully. If I would’ve never gone down that path, I would’ve forever abandoned Catholicism.
@@thomasbegley630 I've heard this objection from Muslims as well, so maybe it'd be a good "two birds with one stone" sort of video.
In addition or as part of the accounts, the rock blocking the entrance was not removed for the Resurrected to come out. In his resurrected body, our Lord did not require a door valet. The rock had been removed to allow witnesses to enter into the tomb. It was made open for us not for Him.
Levi Shalom
I don't expect him to believe it, but I wish Singer would at least admit the Christian interpretation of Messianic prophecy is a coherent and historically based way to read it.
He will never admit that. Jewish apologists launch into spin zones on many of these arguments, and they spin hard. You have to pray for him and all Jews.
@@ntmn8444 what makes your position superior to Jewish apologists?
Then he would logically need to come to the correct conclusion...
@Jesse Dylan Jesus Christ does. You will see one day if you are sincerely seeking the Truth... not only seeking to confirm your own beliefs.
@@michellelaudet5363 ..Judaism is truth, whereas your faith is FALSE =idolatry and blasphemy against the ONE GD. You know nothing of Tanakh and can't read or understand Hebrew... Sorry, but you're WRONG! You will see , one day, if you are sincerely seeking Truth. You'll be clamoring and clinging to a Jew wanting to go with him/her because WE hold the truth. Happy Passover.
I would love to see an actual conversation between you two
@@horusgodson I'd pay gold to see that.
Rabbi Taqqiya Swinger would never discuss these topics with a knowledgeable Christian for fear of being exposed.
Just look at his debate with Dr Michael Brown
@@marlo8456i agree with you. I’ve watched him and he doesn’t seem to be very honest
Great job Trent. The more Rabbi Singer reads the Gospels, the more the Spirit can work in his heart.
perfectly timed Trent! This is a bugaboo for me, and I watched the Rabbbi's video. You're doing the Lord's work!
I'm so glad you got this reuploaded! I was halfway threw it before it disappeared before.
You are so good at defending the faith, thank God for people like you.
@@_ready__ we receive the free gift of eternal life threw our baptism which restores what what lost by the sin of Adam, but we can lose that free gift by freely choosing to reject God threw mortal sin, which is why we repent to God threw Confession where our friendship with Christ is reconciled as He pours His Blood on our souls, and washes away our sins which we have confessed.
Step 1 to salvation: get baptized.
Step 2: don't sin.
@@_ready__ if you read my whole response, this is why we have the Sacrament of Confession, because it's very hard not to go threw life within committing serious sins against God
@@_ready__ dude I'm good in my faith. Confession and Christ's Sacraments and His Church saved my life.
Good luck to you!
@@_ready__ be baptized
@@_ready__ Go away, you follow your own beliefs...
Not to mention all the early apologetics against Christianity grant the empty tomb. All the early Jewish arguments against the resurrection that I have seen are that the body was stolen, which assumes that Jesus had been buried and the tomb was subsequently found empty.
Love how Trent recommended Dr. Michael Brown’s book at the end, it’s the one guy Tovia has debated and refuses to debate again because how well Dr. Brown knows Jewish sources.
What’s more interesting is how the Jewish apologetics they use to prove Moses and the miracles, are the very apologetics we use to prove our faith. Massive witnesses, while the Jews state they have over 3 million witnesses to Mt. Sinai, we don’t need that many, we have the disciples, others who followed closely and 500 witnesses to his resurrection. Then we have St. Paul, who was an enemy and a student of Rabban Gamaliel, who still is a prominent figure in Judaism today. Nothing more convincing than an enemy turned to the faith. Add to that the prophecy fulfilled of the nations knowing the God of Israel. A point that many Jews reluctantly agree with, since they know that teaching the nations about the one true God their very mission and it is their explanation as to why the temple was destroyed. So that they can bring more converts. Who has converted more pagans than Jesus? Whose name is known throughout the world? Who ushered in the new covenant prophesied by the Prophet Jeremiah before the destruction of the second temple? And why have so many Jews been anointed “messiah” but keep failing in their mission over the course of the last 2000 years?
Dr Michael Brown would agree with Dr.Michael S.Heiser that Jesus was comparing Petros ( Peter) to Petra ( the Large Rock Formation) from Jesus 2nd temple period Biblical Judaism teachings: Not saying Peter is the literal "THIS ROCK " which would deny the Roman Catholic interpretation of Matthew 16.
Yes ,You should read Dr.Michael Brown 's book and Trent recommending it is quite funny from Dr.Michael Brown views on some Roman Catholic interpretations of Jesus 2nd temple period Biblical Judaism.
@@davidjanbaz7728 well just like Trent, I don’t have to agree with everything an author endorses in order to appreciate their work on a particular subject. I can point to Protestant Matthew experts who would agree with the Catholic position, and Trent has an episode on this as well, they would just disagree that it has succession but agree that grammar points to Peter being the Rock. In the scholarly world people point to works from people that they disagree on all the time. This is not the slam dunk you think it is.
@@simplydanny that one Protestant scholar D. A. Carson may not be saying what you think as agreeing with the Roman Catholic interpretation.
Your right many Protestants could agree with you against abortion and support General Christian arguments.
This just shows Trent hasn't read Dr.Michael Brown or Dr.Michael S.Heiser very much as to their total 2nd temple Biblical Judaism from the Two Powers in Heaven Israelite theology that Jesus taught and from the theology of the Earliest Historical Christianity.
But it is when you understand the Two Powers in Heaven Israelite theology that Rabbinic Judaism rejected in the 2nd century AD.
Yes, everyone here should watch the debates of Michael Brown with Jewish rabbis, he does an amazing job. The one with Rabbi Tovia is amazing.
Though of course he’s Protestant and we’ll have points of disagreements, there’s still a lot that I have learned from him, especially how interpret the messianic prophecies and Jewish sources.
Your such a fool if i made a book and that book said 10 million people saw me turn led into gold 2k years ago according to your lodgic that means its not only true but that 10 million people witnessed it happen. I've got some land you need to buy
So glad more are taking on the task of countering Tovia. Glad Im not the only one anymore. Thanks!
Hello, me again. I wanted to ask you a few questions about the Protoevangelium of James? Chapter 1v3 makes reference to the 'records' of genealogy. Does the Catholic Church have any ideas if this might be the same as Iddo? Or something expanded? Any help here would be appreciated as this is a major part of my apologetic with regard to the lost bloodline of David. Ergo, Jews today have no way to identify the Mashiach post destruction of the temple and all its record keeping. Thanks!
@@BiblicalApologetics By the way Sam Shamoun refuted Tovia Singer much stronger than Trent, and He has also refuted many Jewish rabbis very powerfully. You can check his channel , "Sam Shamoun"
God will refute you Edom...
@@williamharris8089God refuted you already… He has been doing that for thousands of years already
@@williamharris8089 God has refuted you for thousands of years already
Unrelated, but one thing that's always baffled me is the exclusivity of Jewish membership. A person born into Judaism can completely renounce their belief in God, rescind any theological obligations they have, heck even criticize the very structure of theism itself, and still be considered a Jew even if its just by ethnicity.
However, the moment a Jew converts to Christianity, they are no longer regarded as Jewish. Not by ethnicity, not by their community, religious leaders, nothing. They apparently get fully disowned from their lineage.
At this point, I have to wonder what is even the point of being Jewish? I ask that out of curiosity. How can a member fully attack, oppose, and mock their own religion that is the basis of their heritage be still considered Jewish, but one who converts to Christianity, still believes in the same God as their ancestors did, be fully excluded?
This is wrong. This is not true at all. A Jew will always be a Jew. A Jew who converts is an apostate Jew. They will always be a Jew. The community will disagree. People may disagree but that doesn't invalidate that they were born a jew. You should educate yourself more about Judaism.
I guess that's how it works in the synagogue of Satan. Satan couldn't care less if someone denounces God and becomes an athiest, buddhist, etc. because those worldviews don't actively work against him.
But Jesus Christ does.
I studied that question & I have an answer for you. It seems Orthodox Jews erroneously believe that we believe God has a Partner(it is what they think we mean by the Trinity). Also the Rabbis are divided over wither or not Christianity constitutes Noachide Monotheism or avodah zarah(idolatry). Those who think we are NOT true idol worshippers believe it is permitted for Gentiles to believe God has a partner and still be counted Noachide Monotheists. However no Jew can believe that without being guilty of avodah zarah(idolatry or foreign worship). So in their reasoning an idol worshipper is no longer a Jew vs those other example where he is a bad Jew. "Denying" God makes you a bad Jew. False worship an ex Jew.
That is their theological reasoning. Of course Jews who join the Catholic Church are still Jews by New Testament standards....just saying and we believe those standards are the correct ones.
They regard it as idolatrous to worship the Triune God of Christianity since they perceive him as a different god altogether.
@@tomasrocha6139 Depends there are some Frum Jews who believe Christians are avodah zarah (idol worshipers or star worshipers.) and not Noachide at all. But many believe Gentile Christians are Noachides but a Jew who confesses the Trinitiy is avodah zarah. It can be confusing.
Can Tovia Singer's wife do a cartwheel? Can she? Can she? Checkmate!
Amen
😂
😂😂😂😂
Wife? Who said anything about a wife?
Tovia always attacks christianity but ive never seen people like him actually defend judaism. It's like, they think if they can disprove christianity, it means judaism is somehow true. I've never even seen someone make an argument for judaism?
It’s because it’s an ethnic religion. It’s almost partly why jews are so powerful these days. Their religion just kept them and was cohesive for them(not that Judaism is actually is a religion that has salvation)
they are supremacists, and they dont want anyone being a part of their club except for themselves. they refer to us as cattle in their book. the whole point of his work is to attack Christ, just like his ancestors did.
It doesn't sell or get you views
@@cardboardcapeii4286 that's true, it just makes me wonder why they believe in judaism in the first place. Especially converts
I just think he's kinda hypocrite in his attacks to Christianity, he don't use the same amount of skepcism in Judaism like he does in Christianity. A lot of problems that can be found in Christianity (like authorships) are the same in Judaism
Regarding the bringing annointing after the burial, recall that they had to bring Jesus down and bury him before the Sabbath arrived. Jesus died at 3pm-ish, and Sabath was probably around 6-7 pm. They were also outside of the city on Golgotha when Jesus died. That gives them only at most 4 hours to get him bound and buried in the tomb. Not sure what exceptions to the Sabbath law requiring rest was for treating dead bodies, but It seems highly likely that this burial was itself rushed. That the women then go to annoint him properly early in the monring of the first day tells me they were held back because of the Sabbath law and were waiting until first light to be able to finish his burial as they thought he deserved.
That was my thought as well. Roman crucifixions would actually last way more than a few hours, but because Passover was just about to start they needed to “speed up” the dead aspect.
It even states in the account what was happening.
And if the trial and execution took place relatively quick, people probably wouldn’t have time to gather all the supplies and carry them around during the walk to Calvary.
Even today’s Jews argue what constitutes ‘work on the Sabbath’ such as working the stove, walking with groceries, driving, etc. There’s even a giant cable running around a section of New York City so people have a ‘loophole’ to get some simple errands done outside the home.
So yeah, not surprised it took the women a few days to get out there with the perfumes and oils.
Something I think is interesting is his argument that the story is contrived because "no one would go back to go anoint a body of someone that is already dead". He's arguing that it doesn't make any sense and "no one would do that so it must be contrived" but, if no one would do that then why would they use that detail as a plot device to begin with? He's saying it's a detail that isn't believable so it's not true so it must be a made up detail to get people to believe their false narrative. But problematically, if it's a detail no one would believe, then they wouldn't have used it as a plot device to get people to believe it.
The Rabbi makes an excellent case though in that assertion. The reason for anointing the body was to keep it from smelling/rotting. Well, if it has already sat about for 3 days, it has already begun to decompose. There would be no point to the anointing by then. It's obvious that the Gospel writers needed an excuse to place the women at the tomb, and this was it.
@@Charlotte_Marteli know this comment is late but haven't you considered the possibility that Mary had been grieving? Imagine Seeing Jesus the man Who up to this point had cured the blind, fed 5000 people, made paralyzed people walk, and was also one of you most closest friends. Die crucified (which at the time was one of the most cruel forms of execution). Most people would have been overcome with grief, perhaps thats why it to so long for her to finally annoint Him,
I am just beginning to read a book called "Salvation Is From The Jews", by Roy Shoeman. Shoeman is a Jewish Catholic who maintains that Catholicism could more accurately be called "Post-Messianic Judaism".
@darlameeks I contend had Paul's assertion that Gentiles did not have to be circumcised to now be part of the Jewish movement known as The Way; today there would be a sect of Judaism known as Jewish-Christians who accepted Jesus as the Messiah. They wouldn't have broken away from Judaism and face the wrath that Jews for Jesus or Jewish-Catholics face today. In fact, had Peter and not Paul been the "founder" of the Church, I believe the Catholic Church might not even exist today. Many people would be simply Jewish following Jesus.
Thank you for lifting up the truth and exposing this antichrist rabbi.
Happy Easter Trent - God bless!
*They could have just gone to pay their respects and found the open tomb. Does he think that no people visit graves?*
About time someone did a video answering objections from Jewish rabbis. You should do more Trent. You should look to refute rabbi mizrahi as well. He says a lot of things that are not true and people have been convince of it
P.S tent absolutely destroy the rabbi in his arguments.
I have been reading Rabbi Singer’s take on Christianity for several months now, and am an associate of Hebrew Catholic since 2012. I studied professionally through my archdiocese a good number of years, and do respond more in our Catholic spirit than argue. I have always had compassion for the Jews, especially in that my father taught us to never forget the Holocaust.
He misinterprets or misunderstands, to the point one can walk away along the lines of ‘no good can come out of Nazareth’ to the same sentiment and position towards Christianity.
The site sees Christianity as idolatry. Another Muslim came on sharing my concerns that there are Muslims who hear him out, that could lead to more harm of Christians, seeing that in Pakistan, Nigeria, and stabbings throughout the world.
Reading in depth comments below support my observation in regards to the development of Judaism after Christ, and its interpretation of Scriptures. Likewise, it is notable Judaism has no catechism seeing how many different takes there are among the rabbis today.
When reflecting on the Gospel of John and Christ’s response to the Jewish man who did not understand the meaning of the Bread of Life, His response was that God was not drawing him.
I pray daily that Our Heavenly Father will draw the Jews to Christ.
10:31, the explanation to the rabbi’s question is in the account. Jesus was taken down at the beginning of the sabbath, or it least very shortly before it began. Anointing his body would have counted as work so they waited until the sabbath was over. They also had to wait until the end of the sabbath to get a hold of the herbs and spices since they didn’t know Jesus would be condemned to death until the procession of the cross (remember Pilate tried to have Jews agree to set Jesus free which failed. He killed him only to avoid a riot.) The Jews at the time took the sabbath incredibly seriously and even miracles were considered work. The women would have remained faithful to this.
Mary Magdalene must have been more familiar with Jewish laws than Rabbi Singer.
[Shulchan Aruch394:3] _"One may go out to the cemetery and visit the dead until three days [after being placed in the sepulchral chamber], for perhaps he is still alive."_ [Shulchan Aruch394:3]
Mt 28:8-15 "And this story was circulated among the Jews to the present day.."
Happy Easter
I think Tovia Singer’s heart is in the right place. I have actually spoken with him personally at one point. He is a kind man. But sometimes in his misguided efforts to “preserve Judaism” among Jews, he does go out on a limb when attempting to refute Christianity and a lot of times he will reach for a conclusion that is disingenuous. I’m glad to see that you have responded to some of his videos because he can make some good arguments if you’re not actually well read up on scripture. But his target audience are Jews in order to prevent their proselytization, which is why he doesn’t have to talk with the same level of expertise about the NT that well read atheists or Protestants use against other Christians.
In his efforts, all he has to do is make quick point to discredit the NT and then most Jews will take his word about the NT for what it is.
just got sent this on discord. i am currently watching it. good video
Did you know that your version of what happened at the tomb with Mary magdalene, the other women and the disciples is exactly how it is recorded in the visions of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich in THE DOLORUS PASSION of JESUS CHRIST.
It's a wonderful read ,most suited for the lenten period and especially the holy week.
This was a breath of fresh air. So many apologist channels will make hours of content going after Atheist and Islamic objections to Christ, but avoid mentioning that Jewish ones. Worse still, they treat suggestions to do so as tantamount to an invitation to deny the Holocaust.
Because if you disagree with them they accuse you of being antisem
Please do more videos on this rabbi...my neighbor recently left Christianity to follow him...no longer believes in the New Testament 😢
Tell him to watch sam shamoun debating with jews
Protestant apologist here again! But TRENT! I love your content and could binge it all day. Your videos have been the only highlight of my day sometimes and you seriously have some great work on your channel. Rabbi Singer unfortunately, I believe, has taken up argumentation like this even with the Messianic Jew Michael Brown and has had his argumentation destroyed concerning the prophecies of Jesus and his divinity. I’m glad you stepped on the boat of addressing Tovia. No one except for a few Christians, have stepped up to the plate to dismantle modern Judaism. So again, thank you Trent. Love you man, and hope you do more responses like this.
-Wes
Great rebuttal Trent. Easter blessings to all🙏
I have beeennnnn looking for this!!!! Finally all his videos are his and non of the Christian’s seem to be able to tackle his answers
Thank you Tran!! As always is a pleasure to hear you!!
The problem with Trent's arguments is that they only work if you are already within the fairh, but to someone not in the faith they make very little sense.
Luckily more people are interested in the Bible. Once more people investigate the scriptures themselves they see there is something off between what is in the Bible and what is known as Christianity.
But that’s if people really care. Most people are worrying about life I guess and don’t care too much to read these books which are not very interesting to most
One of the quickest and easiest ways to refute Rabbinic Judaism is with the prophecy found in the Old Testament book of Malachi 1:10-11 about how gentiles all over the world, from east to west, would worship the God of Israel during the messianic age. It creates all kinds of problems for the rabbis because they teach that once the messiah arrives, every Jew will own 2800 slaves and gentiles will flock to them for wisdom and guidance while they study the mysteries of the Torah and the universe and offer sacrifices in the newly built Temple. But Malachi's prophecy clearly states that God will reject the sacrifices of the Jews and will somehow accept the incense and pure sacrifice offered to Him by gentiles all over the world during that period of rejection. But how can gentiles have a knowledge of the God of Israel and Judaism and offer those things in their worship of Him when Jews have never evangelized them, especially not on a global scale? So where does that prophecy fit into the rabbis order of events? There's no room for it at all because it implies a mass apostasy or turning away on the part of the Jews and God's subqequent rejection of them. And the apostasy and rejection can't happen during the rabbis fantastical messianic timeline because they say that the messianic age will be ome of world peace where Jews are in total submission and obedience to the will of God. But that's the only possible time where Jews would have converted the world to the Torah, so it doesn't make any sense. But Christians know exactly what that prophecy in Malachi is referring to, and they knew it right from the very beginning. You can find it mentioned in many writings from the early Church, including in St. Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho the Jew. God has rejected the sacrifices of the Jews, which is why their Temple was obliterated and the Aaronic priesthood destroyed in 70 A.D., just as Christ prophecied 40 years earlier. And gentiles everywhere, from the rising of the sun to its setting, offer up incense and a pure sacrifice to the God of Israel because they have already been evangelized and converted to belief in Israel's king messiah, Jesus of Nazareth. The incense and pure sacrifice thay Malachi saw them offering all over the world is the Eucharist in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that happens on the altars of every Catholic Chruch in the world 365 dyas a year.. So Malachi 1:10-11 demolishes not only the false religion of Rabbinic Judaism but also Islam and Protestantism as well.
Amazing.
I never looked at it like that. Wow.
Baptist here.. trent, please debate rabbi tovia singer.. my suggestion for the thesis.. "Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of Israel."
Even if you can't get tovia to debate you please invite Dr. Michael brown on your channel.
I think it would be great to see you have a friendly discussion with Dr. Brown on messianic Christian Apologetics.
Does rabbi Singer applies the same strict level of scrutiny to the interpretation of the old testament narratives? Genesis, Noah, Abraham.,.... to name a few....I doubt it, if he did, he would not be a Rabbi.
I'm suprised you didnt bring up the complementary accounts of Kings and Chronicles which don't give identical accounts of Solomon
The Gospels are the testimonies of four people about events they experienced, directly or indirectly.
It is absurd to ask that four different testimonies be identical, because that would prove that they are concerted and therefore false.
Our Catholic ancestors preserved four testimonies that are consistent, but certainly not identical.
🎯
Really? So if I and 3 of my friends are robbed, and all of our accounts of the robbers differ ("There was 1 robber, and he was ginger." "No, there were 2 robbers, and they had dark hair" etc), how seriously do you think the police will take our testimony?
In Isaiah 53:11, a few of our English translations have the following text with a footnote: “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied.” The footnote to the reading in the ESV says, “Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scroll he shall see light.” The ESV translates the received text “he will see” (יִרְאֶה yir’eh). But most English translations read against the received text and with three Dead Sea Scrolls (1QIsaa 1QIsab 4QIsad) and the Hebrew text of the Greek translator, all of which preserve the word “light” for what the Servant sees (“he will see light” יראה אור yir’eh ’ôr). Most textual critics and English translators have adopted the reading found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and therefore, have something like: “After his anguish, he will see light and be satisfied” (CSB). The received text probably omitted accidentally the word “light” because the word “will see” in Hebrew is similar to it and the omission can be explained as accidental.
The metaphor “to see light” refers to having life. In Job 3:16, Job asks why he was not hidden like a miscarried child or like infants who did not see light. In Job 33:28, 30, Elihu envisions God as the one who redeems one’s soul from the pit and one’s life then can see light. In Isaiah 53, the servant died vicariously and was buried in a tomb. In Isaiah 53:11, “seeing light” refers to the resurrection of the Servant from the dead because of his work. He will see light and be satisfied in his knowledge, that is, his obedience in covenant relationship with the Lord. As a result, the Lord’s righteous Servant will now justify the many. The resurrection
@Nc Cognito Many commentators find this reading too difficult and our translations have glossed over the difficulties in the actual text. But one need not despair. Many textual critics and commentators have discerned that the original text has been preserved in the Septuagint or the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, since that version has “to death” (εἰς θάνατον), which probably translated a Hebrew text having “to death” (לַמָּוֶת lammaweth). There is only one letter (ת) difference between this reading and the received text, and it is probable that the Greek translation suggests a different and more original Hebrew text yielding the meaning: “He was cut off from the land of the living, because of the transgression of my people he was stricken to death.”
Thus, the prophecy of Isaiah 53:8 originally predicted that the Servant would be stricken to death. He would die vicariously for his people’s transgressions, and the New Testament authors appear to have read accordingly the Song in relation to Jesus Christ’s work on the cross. In 1 Corinthians 15:3, Paul notes that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures. There is no Old Testament passage that details this substitutionary death more than Isaiah 53.
In Isaiah 53:9, several of our English translations have: “And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death” (ESV; cf. NIV). But the NRSV along with several others has: “They made his grave with the wicked and his tomb with the rich.” The received text has “in his deaths” (בְּמֹתָיו bəmōthayw), which the later Greek, Syriac, and Latin versions all simplified to “in his death,” and some of our modern English translations followed suit. But the text is better preserved in 1QIsaa (the Great Isaiah Scroll) which has the reading “his hill” or “his tomb” (בומתו bômtô from בֹּ֫מֶת bōmeth).
Therefore, with most commentators and translations, Isaiah 53:9 predicted that the Servant’s body would be laid in a tomb. It was no minor detail to the gospel writers to record that Jesus’ body be buried in a tomb, and Matthew even highlights that Joseph of Arimathea was a rich man (cf. Matt 27:57ff).
In Isaiah 53:11, a few of our English translations have the following text with a footnote: “Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied.” The footnote to the reading in the ESV says, “Masoretic Text; Dead Sea Scroll he shall see light.” The ESV translates the received text “he will see” (יִרְאֶה yir’eh). But most English translations read against the received text and with three Dead Sea Scrolls (1QIsaa 1QIsab 4QIsad) and the Hebrew text of the Greek translator, all of which preserve the word “light” for what the Servant sees (“he will see light” יראה אור yir’eh ’ôr). Most textual critics and English translators have adopted the reading found in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Septuagint, and therefore, have something like: “After his anguish, he will see light and be satisfied” (CSB). The received text probably omitted accidentally the word “light” because the word “will see” in Hebrew is similar to it and the omission can be explained as accidental.
The metaphor “to see light” refers to having life. In Job 3:16, Job asks why he was not hidden like a miscarried child or like infants who did not see light. In Job 33:28, 30, Elihu envisions God as the one who redeems one’s soul from the pit and one’s life then can see light. In Isaiah 53, the servant died vicariously and was buried in a tomb. In Isaiah 53:11, “seeing light” refers to the resurrection of the Servant from the dead because of his work. He will see light and be satisfied in his knowledge, that is, his obedience in covenant relationship with the Lord. As a result, the Lord’s righteous Servant will now justify the many. The resurrection shows the vindication of the servant and becomes the ground for the justification of the many.
This logic appears to be Paul’s own in Romans 4:24-25 where he interprets Christ’s death for our transgressions and his resurrection for our justification.
textandcanon.org/recovering-the-resurrection-textual-criticism-and-easter/#:~:text=At%20end%20of%20Isaiah%2053,my%20people%E2%80%9D%20(%20ESV%2
Mr Singer needs to get fact checked.
LOL. Tovia is still up to his old tricks I see. I remember the first time Dr. Michael Brown debated Tovia in 1989. Dr. Brown was ambushed by sneaky Tovia who pretended he sincerely wanted to hear Mike's perspective on Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. Dr. Michael Brown is a Jewish believer in Jesus who holds a PhD from NYU in ancient near eastern languages. When Mike got to the meeting he suddenly found out it was a set up where Tovia arrogantly thought he would catch Dr. Brown off guard and destroy him, so the entire debate was recorded. THE OPPOSITE happend instead. Mike so completely DEMOLISHED Tovia in that debate that Tovia being the coward he is, has still refused to this day, to debate Mike. Mike has since debated other Rabbis (e.g. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach) but the other Rabbis Mike debates have integrity (Mike is friends with some of them). I highly recommend any of the books Dr. Brown has written (I studied under him 34 yrs ago) - especially on apologetics.
Would you be able to find a recording and share how it can be found? Thanks.
@@Mark4Jesus I may actually have a recording of it on cassette, buried in the attic somewhere. I think Mike would probably have a recording of it. You should send his ministry an email and ask him...
@@GTX1123 Thanks, I just searched in RUclips and found a copy of it posted. :)
@@GTX1123 This interview is definitely not one he's posting on his website.
God bless you Trent, I actually said someone should do Rabbi Tovia Singer. God bless Jesus is Risen Alleluia 🛐🙏🗝️🗝️💯 Catholic
From Band of Brothers:
Lt. Ronald Spiers: "The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a soldier is supposed to function: without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All war depends upon it.”
DISCIPLE'S VERSION
"The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead (to this world). The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a disciple is supposed to function: with mercy, with compassion, without remorse. All preaching depends upon it."
If by any chance that "rabbi" never accepts Jesus before death. He is going to be in for a rude awakening when he sees Jesus during the 2nd resurrection 😅
excellent observations! Thank you!
On the idea of the empty tomb as a plot device, it makes no sense. You'd just have Jesus appear to the disciples, then they would go to the tomb to see if he's still there. Also, assume Singer is right that announcing a body is only so it won't smell. That may be a technical reason, but rituals around death are emotional, too. We bury the dead to prevent disease, but burial is also very symbolic and meaningful.
“He was despised and rejected- a man of sorrows, acquainted with deepest grief. We turned our backs on him and looked the other way. He was despised, and we did not care. Yet it was our weaknesses he carried; it was our sorrows that weighed him down. And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God, a punishment for his own sins! But he was pierced for our rebellion, crushed for our sins. He was beaten so we could be whole. He was whipped so we could be healed. All of us, like sheep, have strayed away. We have left God’s paths to follow our own. Yet the Lord laid on him the sins of us all. He was oppressed and treated harshly, yet he never said a word. He was led like a lamb to the slaughter. And as a sheep is silent before the shearers, he did not open his mouth. Unjustly condemned, he was led away. No one cared that he died without descendants, that his life was cut short in midstream. But he was struck down for the rebellion of my people. He had done no wrong and had never deceived anyone. But he was buried like a criminal; he was put in a rich man’s grave. But it was the Lord’s good plan to crush him and cause him grief. Yet when his life is made an offering for sin, he will have many descendants. He will enjoy a long life, and the Lord’s good plan will prosper in his hands. When he sees all that is accomplished by his anguish, he will be satisfied. And because of his experience, my righteous servant will make it possible for many to be counted righteous, for he will bear all their sins. I will give him the honors of a victorious soldier, because he exposed himself to death. He was counted among the rebels. He bore the sins of many and interceded for rebels.”
Isaiah 53:3-12 NLT
This was written around 700 years before Jesus came into the earth, yet it describes His life perfectly.
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16
God loves you so much and showed that by sending His Son to die for us so that we may inherit eternal life. We deserve judgement but He gave us heaven through faith in Jesus. He took the punishment we deserved, and by putting our faith in Him we can be saved. The Key To Eternal Life:
ruclips.net/video/uZdv-TtiMkg/видео.html
For evidence for Christianity and answered questions, check out
ruclips.net/user/drcraigvideos
and ruclips.net/user/CrossExamined
because if Jesus really rose from the dead it is the most important fact ever!
This is a risky subject due to a lot of bad faith insults hurled at those that make it. Great job Trent for tackling it and being brave enough to do so.
I believe Trent is himself of Jewish heritage, so that probably helps him avoid that kind of bad faith brush off.
@@MidnightIsolde yea most likely. Wouldn’t be the first time a jew gets accused of antisemitism. Sans St Paul.
In his dialogue with German reformed theologian Jürgen Moltmann, Pinchas Lapide says: "On page 139 of his book 'The Church in the Power of the Spirit' (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1977) it says: 'Through his crucifixion Christ has become the Saviour of the Gentiles. But in his parousia he will also manifest himself as Israel's Messiah.' I find this sentence an acceptable formula of reconciliation."
Happens a lot more than many might think
Every sect is tribal. Rabbi Singer will ignore the hundreds of contradictions in the Hebrew Bible. Christians will ignore the contradictions in the New Testament. Ultimately, it's a question of faith. I believe Jesus is God. I believe Jesus is resurrected. I don't KNOW. I have to take it on faith, as we all do.
Always find it confusing that the Jews can believe that God talked to Moses through a burning bush, but the resurrection of our lord and savior Jesus Christ is just a road to far.
Yeah, i think catholic apologists should focus on refuting jews more. I see very little content in this area when i search for something.
Nice video!
We must take care to avoid actual or alleged antisemitism. Remember, criticising the views of Jews is not antisemitism and neither is to criticise Israel or its government or policies. I disagree with Mr Singer, but I do not hate him. Disagreement is not hatred.
@@michaelhaywood8262 Stop lending validity to their apostate paradigm.
@@collectiveconsciousness5314 One is not an apostate if he never joined the religion. Using your logic, Muslims could claim that you and everyone on this channel are apostates to Islam and should be subject to its penalties.
The Rabbi makes excellent points. I just wish that he would apply his critical eye to the Hebrew scriptures which have as much evidence to support their supernatural claims as the NT does.
Probably one of the best rebuttals that I've seen
A video of yours I actually enjoy. I’m all for critiquing other religions, regardless of Vatican II. Enough Christians have been under-attack and I feel like we should all be mindful before we criticize other Christians. I really enjoy that you’re utilizing your energy in this video to show why Christianity is the answer to salvation ✝️✝️🕊️
The Counsel of Trent is always great. It seems most rabbis are accepting that Jesus is the temple by not showing interest in its re-construction. By the resurrection, the temple had actually been rebuilt.
Hey Trent, in regards to the women returning to the Tomb to anoint the body when Jesus was already in His final resting place...
according to an ancient Jewish manuscript during the time of Jesus (Massekhet Semaḥot 8:1), the body of the deceased had to be inspected for 3 days…which would be a plausible explanation as to why the women returned to the tomb. It was a requirement. That's my short response.
Now for another logical perspective:
Since a crucified person was still under the custody of the Roman government, relatives or friends of the now deceased person could not just simply take down the body once that person died. They would need permission. For this reason, Joseph of Arimathea had to travel to wherever Pilate was in order to ask for his consent to bring down the body of Jesus. There are two reasons to want to promptly bring down a body from a hanging cross (as you know very well). 1 - Jewish law forbade a hanging body overnight because it would bring upon a curse. 2 - The Sabbath was quickly approaching.
Rabbi Tovia suggests that Joseph of Arimathea was a fictional character but regardless if he was real or not, somebody had to take Jesus down from the cross. That much would only seem obvious. So allow me to continue to refer to that person as Joseph of Arimathea.
Moving forward...
Jesus died around 3 PM and since the Sabbath was approaching quickly, Joseph was against the clock. He not only had to make a time consuming journey to parlay with Pilate he also had to hurry back to the Cross which would take up more of his time. After having exhausted precious time to make it to Pilate and back to the Cross, the time consuming process of taking down his body could then begin. Under normal circumstances the body would have been taken to a place to be prepared for burial, according to Tovia's explanation and reasoning. However, the passage gives the impression that Joseph wrapped Jesus' body there at the cross, although this may not necessarily have to be true. This would seem to be the case since time was limited. The main objective was to get Jesus down from the cross and to his final resting place in a timely fashion in order to make it indoors for the Sabbath. The proper formalities of cleaning, cleansing, and anointing the body would have to wait. Given the situation, the most you would want to do is at least prepare the body from a decaying smell so when you go back to clean, cleans, and anoint the body, the odor would be somewhat masked. But someone reading this may still wonder as to why go back to clean, cleans, and anoint the body if he is already in the tomb. I'm getting to that...
Jesus didn't die by a simple wound, He died just before His body was ravaged beyond all recognition. If He died of a simple stab wound, the people caring for His body would have no problem cleaning up his puncture wound when he was taken down from the Cross before wrapping up His body. However, as it was, Jesus' ravaged body would have needed a lot of love and attention before wrapping Him up. That's what any loving person would do for those who they love. But...the clock is ticking and they have to be indoors by sunset. The last thing anyone would want is to leave a loved one in their final resting place in their ravaged state. It would only seem logical that they would want to go back and give the body the proper love and attention in order to leave the body in its cleansed and anointed state for its final resting place.
Now to better explain my first short response:
In ancient rabbinic Judaism, there was a difference in opinion amongst different schools of thought regarding when the soul actually departed the body. In my speculation, perhaps this aided in the reasoning of the Massekhet Semaḥot 8:1 that the body could rise back to life because of past Jewish accounts of the dead resuscitating after having died. According to the Massekhet Semaḥot 8:1, there was a custom of inspecting the dead to make certain that death had actually occurred. This observance occurred for three days (The Jewish Law Annual, Volume 12, page 101).
See also:
www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/ancient-burial-practices
They used a shroud quickly. Shroud of Turin.
I wish you would also do a "When Catholics argue like atheists" to balance things out and help Catholics hold better positions.
Roman Catholics argue like Mormons in claiming they are the only True church.
Particularly when it comes to miracle claims from other religions
@@davidjanbaz7728 I mean, that's the claim of any self respecting religion. Why would any faith tradition say it deserved to exist if it didn't believe it was THE right one? Then you get into "all paths lead to God" and spiritualism New-age stuff.
@@davidjanbaz7728 You're being ridiculous..
Make your own video dude.
Trent makes an excellent point: there is more hard, empiracle evidence for Mary's appearance at Lourdes than for the resurrection.
Like what?
"Hard, empirical evidence"? Is that why every scientist, including those who are religious, rolls his eyes in scepticism at these tales?
Who? Can you name one scientist speaking against our lady's appearance? Can you name a single skeptic of the miracle of the sun at Fatima without looking up news articles? You have preconceptions about the relationship between science and miracles, and are lost to bias. @@Charlotte_Martel
There are contradictions in small details for the same events in the Old Testament as well. That is to be expected when different people are writing about the same events. People remember things differently, they remember specific details differently… that actually points toward the truth of the gospels. If they were exactly the same in every detail it would point toward a fraudulent gospel. Ask any detective who interviews multiple witnesses. If they are all giving the exact same details, it points toward a made-up story. People remember real events a little differently.
Rabbinical Judaism just lends itself to this sort of "argumentation," pointing out technicalities that can just as easily be applied to the OT, just for the sake of attempting to point out a contradiction, scratch his chin, hum, and feel like a *really* intelligent little midwit.
It's basically just fart-huffing in religious form.
I don’t understand how Jews that follow Judaism don’t see how Jesus fulfills all the Old Testament prophesy.
The jews believe that the suffering servant of Isaiah 53 is the nation of Israel and reject the claim that it is about the Messiah.
@@raphaelloferrer220
There's a problem with this because early Rabbis believed isaiah 53 is messianic and second isaiah 53 talks about a singular servant who is rejected by Israel. And the whole point of isaiah 53 is that the servant will redeem his people through his wounds and death
@@raphaelloferrer220 - Kinda like how Protestants see Revelation chapter 12 is Israel and not Mary, Mother of God.
@@Saul2PaulCatholic That's kind of a deceptive comparison
@@EmberBright2077 - not really. I think it's a fair analogy. Protestants look through the lens of scripture with an anti-Catholic bias built in. I should know, I was an evangelical Protestant for 40 years. They read John Chapter 6 and don't see the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
May Rabbi Tovia Singer find the Truth so that, at last, he can declare willfully, Baruch Haba B’shem ADONAI! Shalom Rabbi! Thanks Trent, GOD bless you always, all of you in the family!
Great video!
Great refutation Trent! I'd love to see more refutations to aspects of Judaism.
I think some good context for this, speaking as an orthodox jew. Is 1) this isn't even remotely a main argument or even an important argument that tovia makes. This is just one discussion that came up in a podcast, im not sure what even triggered it but its really not important to orthodox Jews if jesus even lived or not. Doesn't matter or change anything anyway for us.
2) he is responding to/speaking to evangelical Christians who believe in "scripture alone"(i don't know the latin term exactly so i didn't want to try and err) but yea hes not talking to catholics. And the reason is theres a very specific denomination of Christians who target jews, and they're quite cultish about it, firstly they target the "non knowledgeable" jews. Ive literally had one of these missionaries stop me on the street as he was handing out fliers, and ask me where the less religious jews live (he didn't want to debate me or talk to me, a frum yid with a kippa walking to shul on shabbos. He wanted the reform jews😅). So Tovia responds to them and they, unlike catholics, don't have the benefit of the catholic traditions or non literal interpretations, and other responses afforded to catholics. Also lets be honest generally speaking catholics are alot smarter or so ive come to realize watching this channel, listening to knowles and walsh, and pints with aquinas and his different guests, and listening to and reading books by Ed Feser.
Btw the Christian group i was referring to is mostly known as jews for jesus. That group. They are definitely not promoting catholicism
Catholics actually take their faith seriously.
Hey Trent amazing video as always! Keep up the good work! I love how you point this out of theists.
Some people think everything can be intellectualized to dust, and that somehow the truth will be found in that dust.
Praise Jesus our savior ❤
Tovia Singer is weirdly often reformationist-anti-catholic in his approach to anti-Christian polemics. He will often maintain a pro-protestant anti-Catholic stance in the establishment of his Christian adversary, before refuting the Christian argument.
It is bizzare.
It was recommended Rabbi Singer would instruct teaching of the Torah. Instead this site spinned distortion , misrepresentations, false witness along with the regulars with some saying offensive remarks about Christ and Christianity.
Looks like ancient rabbis shut the door on Christ a long time ago.
Actually Rabbi Tovia Singer destroyed Christianity.
Legend says he doesn't want to acknowledge the debate with Miachel Brown and him
The good Rabbi acknowledges it and everyone know Sid Roth edited the video. The good Rabbi teaches Gd and His Holy Eternal Torah, Brown teaches regurgitated Greco Roman myths.
@@paulawallace8784 that deciever knows how well for whom the debate was made for converted to which religion after the debate.
@@paulawallace8784 Brown teaches what Moses and David taught, what Tovia teaches is later rabbinical polemics against Christanity
I think that Rabbi Singer twist words to make you believe what he is saying, he doesn't make sense. Thank you.
The title is an accidental alliteration, including the word "Reupload"
Get them Trent
Thanks much for this video.
This rabbi is addressing messianic jews who are actively prosleytzing in Israel, they even approach jews at the Wall and they are having some success He sounds angry at times but I kinda empathize with him. When we made pilgrimage to Israel one of the bishops told our group that the popes have instructed against prosletzying in Israel, they just look after holy sites and the 80000 Latin/Maronite/Hebrew/Armenian and Greek Catholics who are Israeli citizens. If jews approach them to discuss the faith, that's different, there are about 800 Hebrew-catholics in Israel.
He is lying on the teaching of the bishops i am eastern orthodox though and misquote the church fathers
The Bible calls them the "Synagogue of Satan" for a reason. As a Christian, that's all I need to hear to dismiss their claims.
I studied Judaism and most of those who claim to be Jews, are not Jews to begin with. First off a lot of them don't even believe in God let alone follow his commands, they just follow the traditions and the holidays. Most of these people are just atheists and agnostics claiming a false identity. It's like a person claiming 'im a Christian' or 'im a Muslim but if then they say they 'don't believe in God' and they don't even at least try to follow the commands, well obviously despite this person's claim they are not what they say they are. This is also the same logic you see the transgenders and the furries using... if a girl was born as a girl she cannot claim she is a man, that's just a lie and a fantasy trying to be projected into real life. Then for the furries, they obviously dress up in fur suits and claim they identify as an animal, well no that's also a lie and a fantasy trying to be projected into real life.
That’s because you can’t actually dismiss their claims using your own reason and ability so you do what most Christian’s do and fall back on using Bible rhetoric. Just reveals an absolute misunderstanding and lack of knowledge about your own belief system.
@Nahmanides1 "Rabbi" Singer uses straight up lies and provable falsehoods in order to push an anti-Christ agenda. One example is where he talks about the authenticity of the New Testament. He claims that the Gospel of John was written after the destruction of the Temple. A 2 second Google search can confirm that the apostle Paul, who died prior to the destruction of the temple, quoted the Gospel of John in his writings. Tovia Singer preys, like a filthy Jew, on the ignorance of Christians that don't know their history. He also uses HIMSELF as an appeal to authority of the meaning of Hebrew words despite the fact that a quick internet search can find linguistic experts who disagree with him. So yes, he is of the Synagogue of Satan.
@@JudasMaccabeus1 That verse means to say that most of these self-proclaimed Jews are not Jews, they are just atheists and agnostics pretending to be Jews by following the traditions and the holidays, as if that justifies their false title. You'd be surprised how many of them don't even believe in God for a start let alone follow God's word. Could someone be a Christian or a Muslim simply by following the traditions and holidays? no. If you don't believe in God you can't then claim to be a Christian, a Jew, or a Muslim.
@@JudasMaccabeus1that's something Satan would say
Roy Shoeman did a video series entitled, "What is Judaism?" In part "VII Kabbalah and Hasidism" at around 1:29:00 he discusses Jewish beliefs on the "emanations" of God, the "Ein Sof". He's not the first Jew I've heard discuss these things. One for Israel Ministry recently released a video called, "A Jewish Defense of the Trinity - The Case for Messiah". There they quoted from Benjamin Sommer's, "The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel". Both videos are great introductions to the topic.
Re the objection about anointing a body after multiple days of burial: I am reminded of My Girl where McCauley Culkin's character is dead and at the wake the protagonist is hysterical saying that he needs his glasses, he can't see without his glasses. The script writers were trying to evoke a very human reaction to the death of a loved one, where rational thought could be overridden by emotion. Bringing spices to anoint could've have easily been as much an emotional response "we have to do this bc this is how it is done," as a mental faux pas oops. It's still a reasonably understandable act on the part of the women
Rabbi Singer's first objection seems like an intentional mistake on his part. Can he seriously be so stupid or sloppy that he did not figure it out?
As an atheist, this video only further my belief in both christianity and Judaism being untrue.
Sao Paulo is not a country. Is just a big city in Brazil.
Why don't you guys believe G-d will just forgive transgressions via repentance as is stated all over the Hebrew scriptures? Do you think he is incapable of this?
God can but chooses to remove all doubt. Is God evil for doing this? Or generous? Magnanimous? Like the heroic IDF soldiers who fight for the free world while many liberals are ungrateful? I could care less about Israel if I weren't Christian lol. Am Israel Chai. God bless America god bless Israel Merry Christmas Hanukkah Kwanzaa and New Year!
They don't just hate the New Testament, they hate the Old Testament and covenant as well because God didn't allow them to do whatever they wanted and always punished them for their crimes.
The people chosen by God for the nations continue to reject Him.
God Himself came and created a bond between Jews and Gentiles - what we now call the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. Conversions continue to happen even today.
We(The Catholic Church) are the new Israel. Chosen for the nations. Let us proclaim the Light to the nations.
Jesus is God.
Part of Singer’s implicit assurance that diverging Gospel accounts “rule out” taking them seriously is that he holds to Rabbinic assumptions regarding Torah and it’s transmission and supposed self-accounting - and then assumes New Testament works (or Quran or Vedic lit etc), “must” also assume the same “dictated directly to a prophet by God” matrices of assumptions and FAIL at meeting his fundamentalist Orthodox Jewish “standards”, Historical literary conventions be damned…including historical context of Torah.
In addition he harbors many assumptions regarding New Testament works (and Christian history) from the 80s and 90s at best; un-updated, un-revised. I think it’s related to the self-assurance above, as he doesn’t seem to think it necessary to address any new research or scholarship; if it’s from “Christians”, it’s just reactionary apologetics, not Orthodox, TORAH TRUE scholarship - regardless of the nature of academic scholarship; you can meet this in fundamentalist Christians as well.
The nature of “The Messiah” is not shared between Christians and Jews now; historic diversity of expectations among Jewish groups regarding the Messiah is evidenced in the Gospels themselves. Singer assumes orthodox rabbinic Jewish expectations of later late-ancient and Medieval codification, in no small part formulated in response to Christianity. Also scholars such as Lapide or Neusner who are simply “Jewish” and not Orthodox Jews are of little account to Boteach or Singer.
Finally, the great amount of Jewish responses to Christianity aren’t intended for Christians, they’re intended for mostly-unaffiliated Jews to dissuade THEM from Evangelical Protestant missionary efforts. Catholics and other Christians are not the intended viewing audience; it’s foremost about “keeping Jews Jewish”, a kind of “war of love for Jewish souls”, where “all is fair in love and war”, objectivity regarding (or comprehensive account of), 1st Century Roman Palestine contexts and history since, is often a casualty.
I know you were talking about something else with the Testament of Simeon... the two messiah belief, but... man that got me thinking. It sounds a lot like John the Baptist and Jesus. Wouldn't John be from the tribe of Levi? I'm not saying John the Baptist was a priest, but he does seem to anoint Jesus, though with water instead of oil in the Jordan. That kinda just blew my mind a little bit! Also, I'm not saying John was a messiah either, but his mission was so tied to that of the messiah, that it seems to mesh well with the Testament of Simeon... at least this portion that you put up that I may be taking completely out of context.
It's pretty clear that the way some of the Gospels were written by starting with John the Baptist were addressing the two Messiahs theory. When John the Baptist then says that he is not the Messiah, it puts the theory to rest, but it does seem to be in the conscience of the authors to address.