Thursday, October 21, 2010

Simcha Jacobovici's bias and his mission to destroy Yeshua

I have viewed almost all of Simcha Jacobovici's documentaries and actually enjoy his series "The Naked Archaeologist". Many of his early (circa 2005-6) episodes of The Naked Archaeologist directly attacks Yeshua. In his later installments of The Naked Archaeologists he shifts his focus on debunking and ridiculing non Biblical traditions of the early Christian Church. Some of those traditions, as we all know, are 100% false.

Jacobovici uses thin, usually non-biblical, sources to support his theories. He corners REAL archaeologists, who commonly disagree with him, but Jacobovici presents his hypotheses as sound scientific fact, when the truth his so-called documentaries are mere entertainment made by a filmmaker not an archaeologist.

One example of Jacobovici's disdain for Yeshua is the debacle of a film called The Lost Tomb of Jesus. That speaks for itself.

One episode of The Naked Archaeologist Jacobovici spent part of the program trying to prove that John the Baptist was more important than Jesus. Really amazing.

Jacobovici presents himself as an archaeologist, even though he is a filmmaker and public relations guy. Jacobovici also presents himself as a word by word hardened believer in the Hebrew Bible. Yet he ignores, and so does most of the Orthodox Jewish community, the references of Yeshua in the Old Testament. Especially Isaiah 53.

Jacobovici will reference some of the shallowest and thinnest sources in the Hebrew Bible to prove whatever hypothesis he may have at the time, in my humble opinion, but he unequivocally ignores clear references to Yeshua in the Hebrew Bible.

And probably the most obvious example of his unwillingness to look beyond his internal prejudice of Yeshua, he continuously fails to mention that some scholars, and early Church leaders, considered the Gospel of Matthew to be a Hebrew text. This should be discussed and is not, because it goes against Jacobovici's anti-Christian theme of the show. He should invoke thought on this subject.

As an open minded religious filmmaker he should be looking at the evidence that supports Yeshua as the Messiah and present the evidence as it is written in the Holy Word. The divinity of Christ is always a contentious subject. While the majority of Christians believe that Yeshua was God in the flesh, some do not believe that. Yeshua is the WORD made flesh, his offspring, and that would make Yeshua Divine, in my opinion, but not God our Father. You can watch Yeshua take shape in the Hebrew Bible, but I don't think I have heard any examples of clear references to Christ from the Hebrew Bible from Jacobovici.

He fulfilled the sacrificial parts of the Torah and every other LAW of GOD so Gentiles, and Jews could enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, he is our savior, and no one can follow the Law and go to Heaven, it takes Yeshua because of the atonement through His blood. But the LAW (Torah) is still very much valid. Yeshua says so himself, in the Gospels, His Words.

Filmmakers posing as an educational authority like Simcha Jacobovici may cause psychological harm to the general public, because the public, just like myself, believed that Simcha Jacobovici was an archaeologist and not just a filmmaker. His willingness to hang on to internal prejudices while masquerading as an archaeologist really makes for a dangerous brew.

Some may say that the title of this article is a bit venomous, for that I ask GOD for forgiveness, but until Jacobovici retracts his ludicrous unfounded hypothesis of the Tomb of Jesus, the title will remain unchanged.

But I will add that his analysis of the Exodus was brilliant, Y'hweh is nature, it belongs to HIM, so he can do what he wants with it. If these judgements came by the way of nature then so be it, who are we to judge the Judge.

I must add that I am no archaeologist or complete expert in the Hebrew Bible, there are no complete experts, everyone takes The Word at their own pace and learns by the will of God.

READ MORE on anti-Yeshua themes on The Naked Archaeologist,

READ MORE on our review of "Secrets of Christianity Nails of the Cross"


  1. The episode with John the Baptist was wrong. The child in the painting that was the center of attention was Jesus, not John. The smaller, younger baby. The larger, older child off to the side is John. How could anyone not get that?

  2. Yeshua
    During that period of time, that name is not common or even used. And there is no spelling for that name in ancient Aramaic to support this assumption.The name becomes prevalent around 100 to 125 CE. By way of the Grecian writers.
    Do not presuppose or assume.

  3. sorry but you are wrong, if I understand your comment correclty...

    (Source wikipedia)
    Among the Jews of the Second Temple Period, the Biblical Aramaic/Hebrew name יֵשׁוּעַ Yeshua‘ was common:
    The name ישוע occurs in the Hebrew of the Old Testament at verses Ezra 2:2, 2:6, 2:36, 2:40, 3:2, 3:8, 3:9, 3:10, 3:18, 4:3, 8:33; Nehemiah 3:19, 7:7, 7:11, 7:39, 7:43, 8:7, 8:17, 9:4, 9:5, 11:26, 12:1, 12:7, 12:8, 12:10, 12:24, 12:26; 1 Chronicles 24:11; and 2 Chronicles 31:15, and also in Aramaic at Ezra 5:2. In Nehemiah 8:17 this name refers to Joshua son of Nun, the successor of Moses, as leader of the Israelites.

    The name יֵשׁוּעַ "Yeshua" (transliterated in the English Old Testament as Jeshua)

  4. I have found many of Simcha's programs interesting and thought provoking, making me examine my beliefs and sending me to the Bible to "study, to show [myself] approved..." Maybe I'm too naive. He may be trying to debunk Christianity, but as I watch his programs, I see one correlation after another about the proof of the reality and deity of Jesus. I appreciate the viewpoints presented here. Iron sharpens iron, and I appreciate looking at things, being shown things, from a different point of view.


  5. \\ While the majority of Christians believe that Yeshua was God in the flesh, some do not believe that. Yeshua is the WORD made flesh, his offspring, and that would make Yeshua Divine, in my opinion, but not God our Father.\\

    Nobody ever believed that the Logos/Son was the Father, though this comfusion is often raised as a straw-man argument by heretics.

    I agree--Simcha has a clear anti-Christian agenda and bias.

  6. Jacobovici is to archaeology as Oliver Stone is to JFK.

    Still, like a train wreck in slow motion, I can't look away. He does show some amazing artifacts that I'll probably never get to see in real life. I only wish he wasn't such a snake-oil salesman.

  7. I like watching Simcha, I learn a lot along the way, even if he debunks Christianity, and his bias is so blatant as to be blind. Unfathomable, to Simcha, is the possibility that the High Priest Caiaphas converted to Christianity later. The simplicity of his ossuary with the nail slits, and the open heavenward prayer offering inscribed as a tower speak volumes to me. Yes, I think these might be The Nails. But does it matter? Not to me. I don't need a relic for my faith in Jesus Christ.

  8. I like this last reply, I totally agree. I never thought that he was trying to debunk Christianity, but I guess I can see that now that I've read some of this. I always wondered why an "Orthodox Jew" was spending so much time researching Jesus. I feel like he has more proven Jesus than debunked Him, whether he was trying to or not. I was fascinated by the Secrets of Christianity, about Constantine....proved to me what my husband and I have been learning about Constantine. If Simcha is trying to debunk Christianity, I think it's backfiring on him!

  9. JESUS Himself said that John The Baptist was the greatest among men. In addition, can any of you give a scriptual reference to when JESUS said that HE was G-D?