Did Jesus Predict Crop Circles? Rabbi Singer Exposes the Truth

All right, moving on into new color, Mr. Robert, you're live on the air. Go ahead and present your question, Rabbi. >> Okay, uh Well, I My question is, why do you dismiss the New Testament when it explains crop circles and tornadoes, which is Matthew 13:24-30, and the basis the end of Jeremiah 30, and then it explains a pyroclastic blast of military artillery when gunpowder wasn't even invented to what, the 8th century? To give us any kind of a hint of a continental or a global explosion, and that's explained in our Revelations 18. So, that's my question. Why you dismiss the New Testament when this It complements the Old Testament. >> Could you please tell me where in Matthew we have crop circles? >> It's uh I It's uh Matthew 13:24-30. It talked about the good field infiltrated by the bad seed. The angels asked, "Can we You want to pull up the bad ones?" And he goes, "No, in doing so, you will uproot the righteous ones." >> I I am sorry. You You talking about This is the parable of the weeds and the wheat. There's nothing there about crop circles. I thank you for your question, but you're reading stuff into text that's not there. I encourage anyone to It's a parable. It's the parable of the weeds and the wheat. And it's the parable of those who will make it and those who will not. It's similar to other parables, and there's nothing there about crop circles. People are just reading things in there that are just not there. I don't think we need to go on, but there's a lot of this kind of stuff that's just not there, and I would encourage you I'm not You know, it's not many rabbis who would encourage people to read the Christian Bible. If you but then normally a child of a Hashem should not read books that convey false teachings. But, if you feel somehow compelled to believe in in that one should believe in this then please open up Matthew 13 and it's a parable of the weeds and the wheat, very famous parable. It's nothing to do with crop circles. There's no crop circles there and it's all made up. And that's what people do. They take this vague text and they say this is what it's talking about. It's all silly. Conversely, lahavdil, if you look at Tanakh and you look at the great prophecies of Jeremiah chapter 30 verse 3 that the Jewish people return back to the land. That's very, very precise. It's all about the children of Israel who return back to the land of Israel. There's no other way to read that. You look at Jeremiah 30 verse 7 in contrast, lahavdil el al fi of dollars. You read Tanakh you have there that there's a time that's coming. It's a sorry Eliyahu, the time of great tribulation for Jacob. And there is nothing like it. No parallel. Jeremiah lived 2,500 years ago. He lived at time when the Neo-Babylonian Empire emerged at that time. And he lived in a horrible time. But he's pointing to the future and saying there's something coming down the road and there's no parallel to it. Omi mena yevoshe but from this great tribulation from it, you'll have your deliverance. Wow. That's precise. This is I I don't mean to do this but you when fantastic claims require fantastic evidence. That means if you I just want to make one point cuz I know people will ask this question. If a person wants to think that a certain verse in the anywhere in anything that they call a Bible and it's really talking about that, you have a right to do that. You have a right to do that. Nothing There's nothing wrong with a homily. Nothing wrong with There's a passage that's ambiguous. That's all it says. I think it really is an allusion to that. You have every right to do that. Okay? Listen carefully cuz I need to teach you how to think, which is more important here than crop circles. There's a difference between a homily and apologetics. Meaning, if you're seeking to prove something and you're making a fantastic claim, so you require fantastic evidence. You can't provide some sort of homily that this is an allusion to that. We have to have something that we agree on. That's the meaning of the text. Meaning, it's a postulate. Right? In geometry, in order to prove that if two sides of a triangle are equal, their opposite angles are equal. You have to show that from postulates, axioms that require no evidence, no evidence in order to demonstrate a² + b² = c². Right? This is rudimentary geometry. Right? But you The reason why this fails is because you are asserting that there are postulates here which don't exist. And they're not axiomatic. You understand? A postulate means definition is that this is something that requires no evidence at all cuz it's so self-evident. And you agree to that. And then your postulates I don't mean this personally. Please don't be offended. But you have no postulate. Completely failed. That means the test for apologetics. Meaning, to prove a point means that you have to have uh you have to predicate them on something that's unassailable. And this fails I was going to say miserably, but that sounds very offensive and aggressive and I don't mean that. But you shouldn't do that. This is the Why do I make a deal about this? Because this is done all the time where Christians make these outrageous claims and then we say, "Show me the evidence." And the evidence is something that just blows in the wind, that is predicated on nothing. So, you have to have you make a fantastic claim, we need fantastic evidence. Now, for homily, people are entitled. The only thing is if you have a homily, you just want to say, "Look, there's a verse here and I think this verse is there." You The homily cannot in any way, if you have there's some secret in the text that is esoteric, you know, so that that cannot disrupt or interfere with the plain meaning of the text. You cannot have a homily of any kind if it disagrees with the plain meaning of the text. If it violates that, so therefore, there's no crop circles in in Matthew and and all these things are just inferences that are predicated on things that don't exist except in people's imagination that are good at are fortunate enough to have a YouTube platform. Thank you for your question. If you enjoy this program, please like and subscribe. >> [music and singing] [music] [singing] [music and singing]