I think you may have dug a bit of a hole here. First you said the sacrifice is not necessary for salvation and then you point me to Isiah 53. If Yehoshua is the messiah then according to Isiah 53 he became a sacrifice for our sins. If sacrifices are not necessary the messiah becomes useless. In other words, he was killed in vain. He achieved nothing, because according to you all that God requires is to try and follow the torah. Here is another question: If we had a temple today would you go and sacrifice sin offerings or not?
btw, what does Devarim 6:4 have to do with sincerity? Here is the verse in my bible "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD;" somehow i am missing your point.
Also while we are at it, from your website:
The only Scripture that Ribi Yehoshua and his original Netzarim (corrupted to 'Nazarene') Jews knew and taught was the Tanakh (Jewish Bible), from which the "Old Testament" (begging the question of displacement) — Original Testament (OT) — was Christianized. All of his teachings were based in the Tanakh and he never taught anything contrary to it. Look up the following examples in any world-recognized encyclopedia:
•NT wasn't even written until 4 centuries after the death of Ribi Yehoshua. (The few fragments of Greek papyri from the 3rd century were likely either Roman Hellenist paraphrases from Hebrew Matityahu or Roman Hellenist syncretisms.) Even then, only the Roman Hellenists, who had separated from the original Jewish followers by 135 C.E., accepted them.
oh dear! It is quite clear that the NT was written in the 1st century for reasons we can go into if you want.
•There are thousands of redactions in the earliest extant source manuscripts of NT.
Really? Could they expand on what the mean please?
•Christmas wasn't celebrated until 5 centuries after the death of Ribi Yehoshua… and then it was syncretized from the birthday of the Roman sun-god by the Roman Hellenists who had separated from the original Jewish followers by 135 C.E.
ummm...so what? What does this have to do with the authenticity of the NT?
•Easter wasn't celebrated until several centuries after the death of Ribi Yehoshua… and then it was syncretized from the festival for the pagan goddess I*sh*t*a*r / A*sh*t*o*r*e*th by the Roman Hellenists who had separated from the original Jewish followers by 135 C.E.
Again, so what?
•Sunday wasn't celebrated until several centuries after the death of Ribi Yehoshua… and then it was syncretized from the day dedicated to the sun-god by the Roman Hellenists who had separated from the original Jewish followers by 135 C.E.
And again, so what? Is that all you have? This doesn't look good for you.
How can you look at the past 2000 years of human history and say that Jesus didn't live? That's ignorant, friend.
ignorant? really? to ask for proof of the existence of a person who allegedly did so much but managed to leave so little evidence?
We have nothing he made, nothing he wrote. We do not know where he was born or where he died. We do not have his body and we don't have those of his relatives. We have no records of his existence, no third-party records (save that collected together, both canon and non, in what we now call "the bible"). We don't know when he was born or when he lived. If he caused a revolution in his own time there is no record of that. We don't even have his death-warrant by the person or persons who are said to have condemned him.
Is it so much to ask for some proof?
I'm assuming you have something else than the bible?
We don't need real people to change the way society thinks - the church of the jedi's proves that. Co$ and it's madness proves that.
We don't need real things to have happened to create cults and religions - mormons prove that (sorry, Mormons, but a magic hat and rock? seriously?).
Muhammed lived, we know that. We know where he lived, where he died, what he looked like (despite muslim's violent tendencies about pictures nowadays, there are many pictures made in antiquity of the man). His claim to being a prophet is something else that is essentially unprovable except through faith, and in that he's very similar to any historical Jesus.