Which book is this?

To M, the book is called I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist by Geisler and Turek.
I’ll give an example of some claim brought in the book that reminds me of arguments I’ve seen on the site (maybe also in the Rabbi’s name).
He asks there: what motivation did Jesus’ apostles have to lie? (And maybe saying they were liars is itself a kind of conspiracy theory. After all, you can claim that everyone is lying. If I’m not mistaken, I’ve seen references like that regarding heretics’ claims that presented the priests as charlatans selling the masses nonsense. And also regarding those who created Jewish law and the Talmud. The answer was that this is a conspiratorial and skeptical starting point that has nothing to it besides sheer skepticism.) To strengthen his claim, he adds that all those apostles got was torture, persecution, and execution, which he says strengthens the truth of Christianity. Why would they cling to lies even at the cost of their lives?
So of course there is the bigger picture, and an individual piece of evidence does not carry much weight, but overall, who can claim that he has really delved deeply into the issue and examined Christianity too in light of intuition?
From a bird’s-eye view Christianity can look silly, but so can Judaism. I feel — and I’d be glad if the Rabbi corrected me — that the strength of the intuitive approach lies in the limitation of human resources, since a person really cannot truly examine additional approaches to reality. On what basis can we rest on our laurels before we have examined Christianity, for example?

Just to be clear, I have no interest in Christianity whatsoever, and everything is being brought up here for the sake of a theoretical discussion, as a basis for a general discussion.

But here you have information from the Sanhedrin too, no? So why would they lie either?

The only foundation shared by Christianity and Judaism is the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) according to its plain wording, without interpretations and additions.
The point is that Jewish theology is not drawn from the Hebrew Bible, but from the Oral Torah, which is not based on the Hebrew Bible but claims to be equivalent to it, and compels its believers to accept its authority and the authority of its chosen representatives as though they possess divine authority.
Therefore, from Judaism’s perspective there is no common basis for discussion, even though we are the “people of the book,” because the basis is not the same book.
From Christianity’s perspective — it depends which denomination you mean.
If it is Catholics and the like, who bow to statues and do not accept the Hebrew Bible — then for them too the Hebrew Bible does not serve as any real basis, even though it is quoted extensively in the books of the New Testament.
But if you take people who accept the Hebrew Bible and also believe what is written in the New Testament — they are actually interesting people to discuss things with, because they really do base their faith on, and draw their foundation from, the Hebrew Bible itself.
So, to your question,
that same “objective scale” does exist, and it is the Hebrew Bible alone,
without additional books and without commentators on either side.
Then there is room for a real and fruitful discussion.
I very much recommend examining the foundation on which we rely.
If it is Jewish law as it exists today — then examine objectively whether this is really the Judaism that existed in the days of the kings of Israel.
If it is the New Testament — whether it contradicts what is written in the Hebrew Bible.
And most importantly — do not be afraid to ask questions and answer them yourself according to the Hebrew Bible.

Why does it matter whether Jewish law today is the same Jewish law as it was in the time of Moses or the kings of Israel?
From Moses at Sinai we received a book (apparently) and some laws (according to Rabbi Michi, only a few, and according to others, more). From that point, the Holy One, blessed be He, gave us permission to interpret the laws that were given to us in the book and orally (if the book is from Moses then it says, “You shall not turn aside,” and if not, then it is simply a matter of reasoning).
We accepted certain rulings and rejected others; if it came out matching Moses’ view — fine, and if not, in any case the authority is ours and not the Holy One, blessed be He’s (“You shall not turn aside from all that they tell you” — they will tell you, not the Holy One, blessed be He).

Dan,
What do you mean that Jewish theology is not drawn from the Hebrew Bible? When Genesis describes that God created the world (and not, for example, that the world is eternal), isn’t that a theological principle? When it says that God had a special interest in a particular lineage, isn’t that one too?