How does Professor Toto's method outperform other historical interpretations at First Harvest Ministries?

Professor Toto’s method begins with a simple rule: everything must pass “the Bible test” first, then the history test, then the tradition test” — in that order. That means Scripture is primary, early sources are secondary, and later church or political pronouncements are weighed last, not first.

From there, several distinctives emerge:

• He prioritizes the earliest witnesses (apostles, early fathers, earliest manuscripts) over later systems.
• He constantly asks, “What did the original audience hear?” rather than, “What did later councils decide?”
• He tests popular doctrines (like the 3½‑year ministry of Christ or the Khazar myth) against Scripture, documented history, and verifiable data, and is willing to overturn long‑held narratives when they fail that test.

The result is a methodology that often exposes “handed‑down” assumptions and returns people to an apostolic, text-driven understanding instead of a denominational or political one.

Is there a specific doctrine or teaching you would like 0 to walk through using this method?