Rabbi Tovia Singer Demonstrates How the Church Used Isaiah to Turn Jesus into God

Zakir Hussein in UK calls a show in Texas, USA to ask Rabbi Tovia Singer a question in Indonesia!

Unfortunately the Rabbi overstates his otherwise credible argument when he claims wrongly that the KJV & NIV say:

“For a child SHALL be born to us”.

They do not.

King James Bible

For unto us a child IS born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

New International Version

For to us a child IS born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

He should perhaps consider taking this video down otherwise it leaves a false & inaccurate impression about the Christian Bible translations.



Categories: Bible, Christianity, God

106 replies

  1. Are all the bibles unanimous in their use of “Is” or are some stating “shall”?

    I think the Rabbi is referring to or thinking about missionaries who are deliberately using the word “shall” instead of “is”. It’s likely he took it on face value that the evangelicals were telling him the correct words…

    Ultimately though the fact is Isaiah 9 chapter 5 in the Christian bible (at least in the NIV and KJ) and chapter 6 in the Jewish bible are talking in the past tense.

    Like

  2. Look at the video at 5 minutes precisely and see the text which he claims is found in the “Christian Bible” – which elsewhere he names as the KJV and NIV. So he is referring to Christian Bible translations throughout his talk.

    For all the Christian Bible translations see link below. There is another mistake the Rabbi makes when he claims a very few translations are honest and most have “For a child SHALL be born to us”

    The truth is precisely the reverse as you can see:

    http://biblehub.com/isaiah/9-6.htm

    Like

  3. I have compiled all major versions of the bible and its sequels showing where only 4 of the 22 say “Shall/will be BORN” – and 18 of the 22 say “IS BORN”’.

    ******************************** “Will be born”/Future tense****************************************

    Holman Christian Standard Bible
    For a child will be born for us, a son will be given to us, and the government will be on His shoulders. He will be named Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

    New American Standard Bible
    For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

    GOD’S WORD® Translation
    A child will be born for us. A son will be given to us. The government will rest on his shoulders. He will be named: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    New American Standard 1977
    For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
    And the government will rest on His shoulders;
    And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
    Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

    ******************************************************************************************************************

    ************************************”IS BORN”/Past tense***************************************************

    New International Version
    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    New Living Translation
    For a child is born to us, a son is given to us. The government will rest on his shoulders. And he will be called: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    English Standard Version
    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    King James Bible
    For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

    International Standard Version
    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government will be upon his shoulder, and his name is called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    NET Bible
    For a child has been born to us, a son has been given to us. He shoulders responsibility and is called: Extraordinary Strategist, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    New Heart English Bible
    For to us a child is born. To us a son is given; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    JPS Tanakh 1917
    For a child is born unto us, A son is given unto us; And the government is upon his shoulder; And his name is called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom;

    Jubilee Bible 2000
    For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government is placed upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called The Wonderful One, The Counsellor, The God, The Mighty One, The Eternal Father, The Prince of Peace.

    King James 2000 Bible
    For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

    American King James Version
    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given: and the government shall be on his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

    American Standard Version
    For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    Douay-Rheims Bible
    For a CHILD IS BORN to us, and a son is given to us, and the government is upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counsellor, God the Mighty, the Father of the world to come, the Prince of Peace.

    Darby Bible Translation
    For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

    English Revised Version
    For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    Webster’s Bible Translation
    For to us a child is born, to us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

    World English Bible
    For to us a child is born. To us a son is given; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    Young’s Literal Translation
    For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. there we go – for some reason WordPress put it in spam!

    Like

  5. Rabbi Singer has just emailed me:

    toviasinger1@aol.com

    To p.a.williams007@btinternet.com Today at 13:41

    Thank you for pointing this out. The KJV uses a strange verb to mask this. Yulad doesn’t mean “a Child is born.” They of course capitalize the C of child. The NAS reads that way.

    Bless you
    Tovia

    Liked by 1 person

    • Can you explain this a bit more? Is he looking at a Hebrew version/translation of the KJV?

      I assumes he would have seen the problem with the English version straight away?

      Like

    • According to Skobac yulad means is or was born. The rabbis cannot even agree among themselves. All the so called christian translations at bible hub agree on this. I don’t trust these guys. Not that I need to as I have the KJV by the providence of God.

      Like

  6. I think it’s also worth noting that most of the passage (apart from the most crucial part about when he was born) is using the future participle which could be what is getting confused here.

    Like

  7. This again illustrates why this man is another wicked and vile Christophobe whose hate of Jesus causes him to lie through his teeth with no honor or shame. And it further illustrates why he avoids realm scholars like Michael Brown like the plague: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOifPwOvd58

    This man knows that in Hebrew both past and present tense verbs are often employed for future events. For example, here is what one of Judaism’s greatest rabbis named David Kimchi, also known as Radak, who lived from 1160–1235 A.D., wrote in his Sefer Mikhlol (Folio 45b, p. 92 on pdf) concerning the usage of the past tense in prophecies which obviously refer to future events:

    “And you should know that it is a typical behavior of the past tense verbs in the holy language to use a past tense verb in place of a future tense verb (which are the letters איתן), and this is mostly in prophecies because the matter is clear as if it passed, because it has already been decreed.”

    Even this dishonest rabbi admits that Isaiah 53, which uses the past tense all throughout, refers to ALL the generations of the righteous that suffer, INCLUDING the Messiah!

    And to further highlight his dishonest and deception here us a list of Jewish sources that all confirm the messianic interpretation of Isaiah 9:6-7:

    The prophet saith to the house of David, A child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it, and his name has been called from of old, Wonderful counselor, Mighty God, He who lives forever, THE ANOINTED ONE (or Messiah), in whose days peace shall increase upon us. (The Targum of Isaiah, J.F. Stenning, Editor and Translator [Oxford: Clarendon], p. 32; capital emphasis ours)

    Another explanation: He said to him: ‘I have yet to raise up the Messiah’ OF WHOM IT IS WRITTEN, FOR A CHILD IS BORN TO US (Isa. IX, 5). (Midrash Rabbah Deuteronomy, Rabbi H. Freedman and Maurice Simon, Editors; Rev. Dr. J. Rabbinowitz, Translator [London: Soncino Press], I.20, p. 20; capital emphasis ours)

    Michael L. Brown writes:

    “The oldest Jewish translation of Isaiah 9:6[5], found in the Septuagint, understands all the names as referring to the king, rendering this verse into the Greek as follows: ‘For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel [Megale he arche]: for I will bring peace on the princes, and health to him.’ The Targum, while explicitly identifying this AS A MESSIANIC PROPHECY, renders the verse in Aramaic with an interesting twist, ‘… and his name is called from before the One who is wonderful in counsel, the mighty God who exists forever, the Messiah, because there will be abundant peace upon us in his days’ (translated literally). The problem with this translation, aside from the fact that it is grammatically strained, is that almost all the names are heaped on God, and only the last two are given to the son – although it is the naming of this royal child that is central to the verse. How odd! Clearly, the names refer to the son, not to the Lord who gave them. In other words, the Targumic rendering would be like saying, ‘And God – the great, glorious, holy, wonderful, eternal, unchangeable Redeemer and King and Lord – calls his name Joe.’ There is no precedent or parallel to this anywhere in the Bible and no logical explanation for this rendering, nor is it even a natural, grammatical rendering of the Hebrew. The characteristics of the royal child are central – highlighted here by his names – not the characteristics of the Lord. As the brilliant Hebrew and Rabbinic scholar Franz Delitzsch noted, even Samuel David Luzzato, one of the greatest Italian rabbis, rightly observed that ‘you do not expect to find attributes of God here, but such as would be characteristic of the child.’ This agrees WITH THE TALMUDIC AND MIDRASHIC WRITINGS, along with the comments of Abraham Ibn Ezra, ALL OF WHICH STATE THAT THE NAMES REFER TO THE CHILD.” (Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus – Messianic Prophecy Objections [Baker Books, Grand Rapid MI, 2003], Volume Three, pp. 32-33; capital emphasis ours)

    Brown writes in fn. 86 that,

    “… Cf. the following Rabbinic statements: ‘R. Yose the Galilean said: “The name of the Messiah is Peace, FOR IT IS SAID, EVERLASTING FATHER, PRINCE OF PEACE”’ (Midrash Pereq Shalom, p. 101); ‘The Messiah is called by eight names; Yinnon [see Ps. 72:12], Tzemach [e.g., Jer. 23:5]; PELE’ [WONDERFUL, Isa. 9:6(5)], YO’ETZ [COUNSELOR, Isa. 9:6(5)], MASHIACH [MESSIAH], EL [GOD, Isa. 9:6(5)], GIBBOR [HERO, Isa. 9:6(5)], and AVI ‘AD Shalom [ETERNAL FATHER of Peace, Isa. 9:6(5)];’ see Deuteronomy Rabbah 1:20.” (Ibid. p. 210)

    The great medieval commentator Abraham Ibn Ezra, despite applying the passage to Hezekiah, nonetheless admits that all of these names are titles of the child in question:

    “The correct view in my opinion IS THAT ALL THESE ARE NAMES OF THE CHILD. pele’ – because the Lord did wonders in his days. yo’ets – such was Hezekiah [as it is written], ‘And the king took counsel’ [see 2 Chron. 30:2]; ’el gibbor – because he was strong, and the kingdom of the house of David was prolonged because of him; [abi] ‘ad – the word has the same meaning as ‘dwelling in eternity’ [in Isa. 57:15]; sar shalom – because there was peace in his days.” (Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus – Theological Objections [Baker Books, Grand Rapids MI 2000], Volume 2, p. 46; capital emphasis ours)

    This candid admission clearly rules out Hezekiah from being the one spoken of, unless one wants to believe that he was the Mighty God in human flesh!

    Finally, section nine of the Huppat Eliyahu and section 7 of Rabbeinu HaKadosh in Otsar Midrashim applies all these names to the Messiah.

    Now unless you want to accuse these rabbinic authorities of not knowing Hebrew, these examples simply prove that Singer is another dishonest troll who has no integrity or honor.

    Besides, if he is right about Jesus then this proves that Muhammad was a liar and false prophet (which he was but for other reasons) since “rabbi” denies that Jesus is the Messiah and rejects the Messiah coming twice, all of which your profit accepted as facts.

    So tell Zakir Hussein to muster up some courage and show his face in my paltalk room and use the rabbi’s objections against so he can see what I will do to him and his profit.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hopefully, this will help keep you guys honest as it serves to humiliate this wicked lying rabbi for what he truly is:

      Hebrew Tenses http://jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/hebrew-tenses

      Sometimes it is claimed that the messianic prophecies cited by Christians are in the past tense. Therefore, it is said, they cannot refer to a future, coming Messiah.

      This is an invalid argument. There is no such thing as tense” in biblical Hebrew. (Modern Hebrew, on the other hand, does have tenses.) Biblical Hebrew is not a “tense” language. Modern grammarians recognize that it is an “aspectual” language. This means that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present, or future depending on the context and various grammatical cues. The most well known grammatical cue is the “vav-consecutive” that makes an imperfective verb to refer to the past.
      Therefore it is wrong to say that Isaiah 53 or other prophecies are in the “past tense.” Biblical Hebrew has no tenses. There are many examples of what is wrongly called the “past tense” form (properly called “the perfective” or “perfect”) being used for future time.

      This fact was recognized by the medieval commentators as well as by modern grammarians, as shown by the following citations.

      Medieval Jewish grammarian and commentator David Kimchi on the prophets’ use of the perfect for future events:

      “The matter is as clear as though it had already passed.”

      David Kimchi, Sefer Mikhlol. Cited in Waltke, Bruce K. and O’Connor, Michael Patrick. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), p. 464 n. 45. They reference Leslie McCall, The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System: Solutions From Ewald to the Present (Sheffield: Almond, 1982), p. 8.

      Rabbi Isaac ben Yedaiah (13th c.)

      [The rabbis] of blessed memory followed, in these words of theirs, in the paths of the prophets who speak of something which will happen in the future in the language of the past. Since they saw in prophetic vision that which was to occur in the future, they spoke about it in the past tense and testified firmly that it had happened, to teach the certainty of his [God’s] words — may he be blessed — and his positive promise that can never change and his beneficent message that will not be altered.

      Saperstein, Marc. “The Works of R. Isaac b. Yedaiah.” Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1977, pp. 481-82. Cited in Daggers of Faith by Robert Chazan, Berkeley: UC Press, 1989, p. 87.

      From the standard grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar (section 106n, pp. 312-313):

      More particularly the uses of the perfect may be distinguished as follows: — …To express facts which are undoubtedly imminent, and, therefore in the imagination of the speaker, already accomplished (perfectum confidentiae), e.g., Nu. 17:27, behold, we perish ,we are undone, we are all undone. Gn. 30:13, Is. 6:5 (I am undone), Pr. 4:2…This use of the perfect occurs most frequently in prophetic language (perfectum propheticum). The prophet so transports himself in imagination into the future that he describes the future event as if it had been already seen or heard by him, e.g. Is. 5:13 therefore my people are gone into captivity; 9:1ff.,10:28,11:9…; 19:7, Jb. 5:20, 2 Ch. 20:37. Not infrequently the imperfect interchanges with such perfects either in the parallel member or further on in the narrative.

      David (“Fortress of David,” 18th c. commentary by David Altschuler) on Jeremiah 31:32:

      “I will place — lit. I placed. This is the prophetic past. I will incline their hearts to keep the Torah.”
      Cited in Rosenberg, A. J. Jeremiah: A New English Translation. New York: The Judaica Press, 1985, vol. 2, p. 255.

      Contemporary Jewish commentator Nahum Sarna on Exodus 12:17, “for on this very day I brought your ranks out of the land of Egypt”:
      This is an example of the “prophetic perfect.” The future is described as having already occurred because God’s will inherently and ineluctably possesses the power of realization so that the time factor is inconsequential.

      Exodus: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991), p. 59.

      From the recent textbook of Biblical Hebrew, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Sec. 30.5.1.e, pp. 489-490):

      Referring to absolute future time, a perfective form may be persistent or accidental. A persistent (future) perfective represents a single situation extending from the present into the future.

      Until when will you refuse to humble yourself before me?
      Exod 10:3

      With an accidental perfective a speaker vividly and dramatically represents a future situation both as complete and as independent.

      And concerning Ishmael . . . I will bless him.
      Gen.17:20

      Women will call me happy.
      Gen. 30:13

      We will die. We are lost, we are all lost.
      Num. 17:27

      This use is especially frequent in prophetic address (hence it is also called the “prophetic perfect” or “perfective of confidence”).

      I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob
      Num. 24:17.

      In the past he humbled . . . in the future he will honor . . . The people walking in darkness will see a great light.
      Isa. 8:23-9:1

      Waltke and O’Connor [full reference given above], pp. 489-490.

      Like

    • this may be all true Sam but the context of Isaiah 9 is key here and does not support the traditional Christian reading.

      Liked by 2 people

    • The Hebrew verb is in the Qal Perfect, which points to completed action, as Dr. Michael Brown, and Rabbi David Kimchi / Radak (in the quote Sam provided) and Eric Bin Kisam wrote above:

      What Rabbi Singer saying is essentially correct, because like in Arabic, hebrew verb dont differentiate between present or future tense, the verb only recognize perfect tense which is a completed action while the imperfect tense is an incomplete action.

      This is true; the action is seen as completed, because it has been decreed. It is seen as a prophetic completed decreed action; which can also be about the future.

      “. . . because it has already been decreed.”

      It is interesting that The Targum (Chaldean/Aramaic paraphrases) of Isaiah 9:6 (9:5 in Hebrew) does indeed say that is about the Messiah.

      It is a little different than that one Dr. Brown gave, (based on different translations ?) but they both say this text (Isaiah 9:6 / 9:5 in Hebrew) is about the Messiah.

      “The Prophet said to the house of David, for unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is Given, and He has taken upon Himself the law to keep it. His name is called from eternity: Wonderful, the mighty God, who liveth to eternity, The Messiah, whose peace shall be upon us in his days.” (The Chaldee Paraphrase of the Prophet Isaiah, page 30-31) (see the link at google books)

      https://books.google.com/books?id=_boCAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=chaldee+paraphrase+Isaiah#v=onepage&q=a%20child%20is%20born&f=false

      “The Targum, while explicitly identifying this AS A MESSIANIC PROPHECY, renders the verse in Aramaic with an interesting twist, ‘… and his name is called from before the One who is wonderful in counsel, the mighty God who exists forever, the Messiah, because there will be abundant peace upon us in his days’ (translated literally).” (Michael Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, volume 2, page 46)

      The problem with saying this was totally fulfilled by Hezekiah the king, was that it was not. He did not bring in everlasting peace or justice and soon the prophet told him about the future and that Judah was going to be carried away into exile to Babylon.

      “The only godly king of that era, Hezekiah, hardly lived up to any of the promised given, and before he was dead, the prophet Isaiah informed him that his descendants would be taken into exile in Babylon (see Isaiah chapter 39).” (page 45, Michael Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Volume 2, Theological Objections.)

      Plus, Rabbi Singer tries to say that Hezekiah’s name is “mighty God”, because his name means “mighty God” – his name means “Yahweh strengthens”,חזקיהו = חזק + יהו but the words used for “mighty God” are “El Gibbor”. (cognate with the Arabic Al Jabbar – الجبار ) They are close in meaning, but different words.

      But even more than that, the Jewish idea of the Messiah comes from Psalm 2 as the anointed king who is David and and a descendent of David, who is called God’s Son, but also as each king failed to bring in eternal peace and the government being on his shoulder’s (justice), the idea of a future Messiah kept being developed in the Jewish thought.

      That is why the Jews who wrote the Targums (Aramaic / Chaldee paraphrases of the Hebrew) interpreted these passages as about the Messiah to come.

      “. . . as each king failed to live up to the high prophetic expectations, disappointment set in. But these are God’s words and God’s promises. How could they have failed to reach their fulfillment? It was this kind of tension that caused the people of Israel to begin to look for a greater son of David, the anointed one (Mashiach) par excellence.” (Michael Brown, ibid, volume 2, page 44)

      Like

    • With the name of Allah

      Rabbi Singer is correct that christians translations forced to make it to appear that this is about the future event foretelling Jesus and his divinity.  From my study, Singer is correct that the context of this passage describes events that had already taken place before Jesus.

      The Hebrew text of  9:5 utilises verbs which are conjugated in the past tense, while christians translations utilises a combination of present and future tenses in the corresponding phrases. This is deceptive.

      The first verb that appears in the verse is יֻלַּד (yulad).  This is a conjugation of the root verb יָלַּד (yalad), [to] bear, in the 3rd-person, singular, masculine, past tense, in the pu’al stem, a passive verb construct, that gives it the meaning has been born or was born.

      Christians translations render  yulad at Isaiah 9:6 as is born, or shall be born in the present /future tense. This is dishonest, because other identical instances which the term  (yulad) appear in the Hebrew Bible, christian translations correctly renders the term as were born, all of them, except at Isaiah 9:6.

      Apart from linguistic, as br. Paul Williams mention the context of Isaiah 9 does not allow the christian reading because it deals with history in the Kingdom of Judah during a time when the Assyrian at war with them not a future event.

      Liked by 2 people

    • @Eric bin Kisam

      Exquisite rebuttal. You are very good at conveying what the Rabbi was saying and not allowing people with certain agendas to distract from the context and the linguistics involved (they know who they are). Although it is obvious to us what the Rabbi said and it could not be clearer we have to make sure that we don’t allow these people to try and throw red herrings at others who are trying to seek to understand and ultimately the truth of the 1 and only God who has no partners and is indivisible.

      Like

  8. Even if in some situations for poetic effect, the past verb is used for future, then that is an interpretation and needs to be in the commentary as only a possible interpretation.

    But if the translation itself converts the past verb to the future verb, then as the Rabbi says, that is deception and to do deception to the Word of God is wicked as the Blessed Qur’an itself says.

    Moreover, reading the chapters of Isaiah as a whole, it is clear beyond abundance that Isaiah is about the epic event of the destruction of the Assyrian army that the Rabbi says.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Which part of the quotes weren’t clear to you? The ones where I showed that even Jewish rabbis interpreted Isaiah 9:6 AS A PROPHECY OF MESSIAH?

      The prophet saith to the house of David, A child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it, and his name has been called from of old, Wonderful counselor, Mighty God, He who lives forever, THE ANOINTED ONE (or Messiah), in whose days peace shall increase upon us. (The Targum of Isaiah, J.F. Stenning, Editor and Translator [Oxford: Clarendon], p. 32; capital emphasis ours)

      Another explanation: He said to him: ‘I have yet to raise up the Messiah’ OF WHOM IT IS WRITTEN, FOR A CHILD IS BORN TO US (Isa. IX, 5). (Midrash Rabbah Deuteronomy, Rabbi H. Freedman and Maurice Simon, Editors; Rev. Dr. J. Rabbinowitz, Translator [London: Soncino Press], I.20, p. 20; capital emphasis ours)

      Michael L. Brown writes:

      “The oldest Jewish translation of Isaiah 9:6[5], found in the Septuagint, understands all the names as referring to the king, rendering this verse into the Greek as follows: ‘For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel [Megale he arche]: for I will bring peace on the princes, and health to him.’ The Targum, while explicitly identifying this AS A MESSIANIC PROPHECY, renders the verse in Aramaic with an interesting twist, ‘… and his name is called from before the One who is wonderful in counsel, the mighty God who exists forever, the Messiah, because there will be abundant peace upon us in his days’ (translated literally). The problem with this translation, aside from the fact that it is grammatically strained, is that almost all the names are heaped on God, and only the last two are given to the son – although it is the naming of this royal child that is central to the verse. How odd! Clearly, the names refer to the son, not to the Lord who gave them. In other words, the Targumic rendering would be like saying, ‘And God – the great, glorious, holy, wonderful, eternal, unchangeable Redeemer and King and Lord – calls his name Joe.’ There is no precedent or parallel to this anywhere in the Bible and no logical explanation for this rendering, nor is it even a natural, grammatical rendering of the Hebrew. The characteristics of the royal child are central – highlighted here by his names – not the characteristics of the Lord. As the brilliant Hebrew and Rabbinic scholar Franz Delitzsch noted, even Samuel David Luzzato, one of the greatest Italian rabbis, rightly observed that ‘you do not expect to find attributes of God here, but such as would be characteristic of the child.’ This agrees WITH THE TALMUDIC AND MIDRASHIC WRITINGS, along with the comments of Abraham Ibn Ezra, ALL OF WHICH STATE THAT THE NAMES REFER TO THE CHILD.” (Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus – Messianic Prophecy Objections [Baker Books, Grand Rapid MI, 2003], Volume Three, pp. 32-33; capital emphasis ours)

      Brown writes in fn. 86 that,

      “… Cf. the following Rabbinic statements: ‘R. Yose the Galilean said: “The name of the Messiah is Peace, FOR IT IS SAID, EVERLASTING FATHER, PRINCE OF PEACE”’ (Midrash Pereq Shalom, p. 101); ‘The Messiah is called by eight names; Yinnon [see Ps. 72:12], Tzemach [e.g., Jer. 23:5]; PELE’ [WONDERFUL, Isa. 9:6(5)], YO’ETZ [COUNSELOR, Isa. 9:6(5)], MASHIACH [MESSIAH], EL [GOD, Isa. 9:6(5)], GIBBOR [HERO, Isa. 9:6(5)], and AVI ‘AD Shalom [ETERNAL FATHER of Peace, Isa. 9:6(5)];’ see Deuteronomy Rabbah 1:20.” (Ibid. p. 210)

      The great medieval commentator Abraham Ibn Ezra, despite applying the passage to Hezekiah, nonetheless admits that all of these names are titles of the child in question:

      “The correct view in my opinion IS THAT ALL THESE ARE NAMES OF THE CHILD. pele’ – because the Lord did wonders in his days. yo’ets – such was Hezekiah [as it is written], ‘And the king took counsel’ [see 2 Chron. 30:2]; ’el gibbor – because he was strong, and the kingdom of the house of David was prolonged because of him; [abi] ‘ad – the word has the same meaning as ‘dwelling in eternity’ [in Isa. 57:15]; sar shalom – because there was peace in his days.” (Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus – Theological Objections [Baker Books, Grand Rapids MI 2000], Volume 2, p. 46; capital emphasis ours)

      This candid admission clearly rules out Hezekiah from being the one spoken of, unless one wants to believe that he was the Mighty God in human flesh!

      Finally, section nine of the Huppat Eliyahu and section 7 of Rabbeinu HaKadosh in Otsar Midrashim applies all these names to the Messiah.

      Or the part that the rabbi is a lying deceitful Christophobe?

      I guess these rabbis were idiots or illiterates like your profit since they seemed oblivious to the fact that Isaiah 9 was about the destruction of the Assyrian army.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. The very first verse of Isaiah says what the Book of the Prophet Isaiah is about concerning the wickedness of the Prophet of Israel and the destruction from the Assyrian army and God’s assistance to the Children of Israel when they return to him and repent and so on:

    “The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.”

    Scholars say that chapters 1-39 are from this Prophet Isaiah and then two more other Prophets make up the rest of the Book of Isaiah.

    Just a small clarification, when I say that it is beyond abundance that Isaiah is about the epic and immediate destruction of the vast Assyrian army, I meant Isaiah 9 and not all of Isaiah. Chapter 8 talks about the destruction that the Assyrian army caused in Judea. Chapters 9 and on pick up the thread on this and continues the narrative.

    I don’t know for sure how every single rabbi interpreted the Book of Isaiah but in general if you ask any rabbi if Isaiah 9 is about the epic event around King Hezekiah or about the future messiah, then I assume they will say the epic event around King Hezekiah.

    This is just from reading the text of Isaiah which makes the above as clear as daylight.

    Anyone can read it themselves….

    http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt1009.htm

    Like

  10. The content of what Sam is quoting is true. But I would not call people “lying wicked Rabbi” or “lying deceitful Christophobe”. That is unnecessary and ad hominem. They are trying to defend their views from their presuppositions.

    Even if they do that to us, like the way some do here, and call us names, we should not do that in return to them.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ken I have asked you before if you will condemn Sam’s hate speech as you are quick to do when others use it.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Ken is too naive and too simplistic since he doesn’t know Singer at all if he is going to try to defend that this man isn’t a christophobe who hates Jesus with a passion. And yet ironically he believes in total depravity and the fact that unregenerate man hates and suppresses the truth of God.

      Moreover, for Ken to condemn me he must condemn your profit first for not just spewing so much hate but for also murdering people for exposing him for the antichrist he was.

      Finally, I actually condemn Ken for condemning others for not holding to his myopic view of how Christians should treat persistent blasphemers and perverters of God’s Word, due to his highly selective reading if the Holy Bible. Now if Ken wants to make the mistake of challenging on it here I will be more than happy to put him in his place.

      Like

    • Now Sam condemns Ken! OUCH!

      Like

    • Williams, don’t you love me for being consistent across the board and not being biased? I learned from the best since your criticisms of your fellow Muslims like Rashid and Andalusi have motivated to do the same with those among my own camp. 😉

      Liked by 1 person

    • Ken, in future I wouldn’t be so quick to jump to sam’s defence, he’ll throw you under the bus in the blink of an eye, when it suits him!! As he’s just done.

      Never mind! You meant well! Poor Ken!

      Liked by 2 people

    • You must got me confused with Ken since he threw overboard and left me to drown by attaching me here not too long for not agreeing with his myopic way of doing things. So get your facts straight.

      Like I said, enough of the red herrings and smokescreens and get back to the actual topic of the thread.

      Like

    • Sam,
      I don’t condemn you as a person, nor your content when you stick to intellectual and reasonable argumentation using quotes, verses, Qur’an verses and Hadith and Sira and Tafsir quotations. But your methods of having insults and name calling is not good.

      I don’t know if many Muslims read your material, ( or maybe they used to and don’t anymore; but I could be wrong, maybe they read it all) when it is laced with those kinds of insults at the beginning and at the end, etc. Again, the content and argumentation was good, but the method of insulting, etc. is not right.
      None of the verses you use for this are commands for us as believers to copy or imitate. The prophets and Jesus and Paul and apostles and God Himself in the OT could do that; but where in the NT does it say that we can imitate that behavior? Mind you, we can call people heretics, blasphemers, etc. But I don’t see where in the NT that we can call people “slime” and “sewage”, and other insults. Of course I believe in total depravity, etc. but the Bible does not give us permission to be rude or insulting. What ever happened to “speaking the truth in love” and “do apologetics “with gentleness and respect”? We are not prophets or apostles. Even if people like Rabbi Singer are deliberately lying, we don’t know that. They are deceived for sure, and they sincerely think they are right; but they are blind and ignorant.

      I think it is better to err on the side of not-judging people’s motives. (see I Corinthians 4:5)

      I think we can judge people by their fruit, and if they try to sneak into church and teach people false doctrine, etc. But our context is evangelism.

      Anyway, you won’t “put me in my place” since the NT does not give us commands to that same thing as a method of evangelism.

      I still appreciate your content and argumentation when you stick to quoting the Qur’an, Bible, Tafsirs, Sira, and Hadith, historical references, other books, etc. but I agree with Dr. White more on this issue. And Nabeel Qureshi and Samuel Green are respectful also. I don’t think even David Wood does this kind of thing. He is sharp and witty, but I have never seen him just throw insult after insult out.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Ask Ken rightly says

      “the Bible does not give us permission to be rude or insulting. What ever happened to “speaking the truth in love” and “do apologetics “with gentleness and respect”?”

      Like

    • Ken,

      Through our limited exchanges on Pauls blog I have always found you to be pleasant and sincere. Sure, we can all through the banter at each other but that’s just our egos talking (unfortunately). I enjoy your comments and point of view even when we disagree.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. Yes, Ken I agree, shamoun needs to change his vile, nasty tone! More of you Christians should try and teach him manners and consideration towards people he disagrees with. You’ve got a reallly tough job, Ken! LOL!! You’re more likely to convert one of the Muslims on this blog to your way of thinking than teaching shamoun etiquettes of debate, good manners and compassion!! LOL!!!
    I eagerly await a kinder shamoun!! Me thinks that’ll be a very, very long wait!!! Like Never!!! LOLZ!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • What a joke Jacob turned out to be. If Ken’s approach would win anyone here then please explain to me all the vitriol, venom, attacks and even blasphemies hurled at his way by virtually everyone here,including Williams? Face it this is just another satanic tactic on the part of all you anti-trinitarians in order to distract us from exposing you for the blasphemers and perverters of God’s Word that you guys happen to be.

      Now I pray for a day when an honest Jacob will surface, not this charlatan who masquerades as an agent of righteousness (cf. 2Corinthians 11:13-15).

      Nice try though. 🙂

      Like

  12. Wow sam, you’re seriously deranged! Now you’re attacking your own because they try and advise you to change your tone! In no way could one describe what Ken wrote as condemnation of you, sam! Just very mild admonition! Yet you are incapable of learning from this!! Instead of taking it as brotherly advice, your attacking him, calling him naive and simple and threatening to put him in his place!

    Sam, you seriously need help. I’m not joking anymore. You need to take a break from apologetics/debating/writing articles and spend some time with your beautiful daughters and just chill man! This amount of anger and hostility is bad for your health. Whatever differences we have, as a Muslim I have to care about your welfare and wellbeing. Take a break.

    Liked by 1 person

    • There you again exposing yourself as a tool of the enemy to try to divide and conquer. You make your father proud. To correct you Ken has publicly condemned me here in the past and I said nothing. Now however I will put him in his place in front of everyone and expose his myopic reading of Scripture by showing that our Lord Jesus, the Apostles and the Prophets did insult and ridicule people who deserves it. So Ken doesn’t know what he is talking about when he says we shouldn’t call others names. This again is the result of his selective reading of the Holy Bible.

      Like

    • Thanks Williams. Coming from me means a lot. Love you big guy. 👊🏻

      Like

    • St Sam may your effulgent glory be praised!

      While i am happy that you have revealed the truth about the woeful misinterpretation by the devious Ken i would like to ask you what punishment he should receive? Maybe forcing to him to listen to one of your lectures?

      Liked by 2 people

  13. Ok…sam…so how do you justify insults, abuse, name calling with the command of your god-man (or is it man-god??) , ‘love your enemy’?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Very easy. Read Matthew 23:13-39; Luke 11:37-51; Acts 13:6-12; Philippians 3:1-2; 2 Peter 2:12, 22 (1-22) for starters. Then read 1 kings 18:27; Psalm 2:4; 37:12; Proverbs 1:26; Isaiah 1; Ezekiel 23:20-23; Jeremiah 4:22,10:8, 14; Malachi 2:1-3 just to name a few. And make sure you finish this up with Ecclesiastes 3:1-8.

      Now that I got this smokescreen out of the way, no thanks to Ken, time to get back to the real topic of this thread. So enough of your red herrings.

      Like

  14. BTW sam, I haven’t told any lies ( well not on this blog😜!), so I am ‘honest’

    Like

  15. Oh no sammy, can’t get out of it that easily! I sense your unease! Don’t just give me random references from the bible, quote me where the bible allows you to insult, abuse and say all the hateful things that are constantly coming from you?

    Because my dear, hateful bigot, the minute you quote anything from the bible justifying your vile speech you have Contradicted your lord and saviour, as he has commanded you to ‘love’ your enemies!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Oh no you lying agent of Satan, don’t try to avoid the verses I gave you since Jesus and the Apostles were examples for us to follow. Does 1 Corinthians 11:1 and Ephesians 5:1 appear in your Bible? What about Proverbs 25:5 and Ecclesiastes 3:1-8? Noreicer, are you insinuating that Jesus and his followers were hypocrites who didn’t practice what they preached you blasphemous heretic since they told us to behave one way while they did the exact opposite?

      Nice try though you charlatan. Like I said you make your daddy proud (cf. John 8:44).

      Now unless you have something to say that is relevant to singer then perhaps you need to return to your cave for the benefit of us all.

      Like

  16. ‘Lying agent of satan’. Tut, tut, sammy. Not very ‘loving’ is it! So what did jesus say about one’e ‘enemies’ ??

    So how come the god-man ( or man-god) didn’t know that his believers would need to insult their enemies?? Why couldn’t he figure out that COMMANDING his followers to ‘love’ their enemies and then allowing the followers to insult/abuse the ‘enemies ‘, is one of the BIGGEST contradictions in human history???!!! How come your god couldn’t figure that one out!!! LOL

    Like

    • Wow! Talk about a son of the devil (cf. Acts 13:10) who had changed the focus of the thread to something other than singer. You do make your father proud. You mean the same God-man who inspired Priverbs 26:5? That same God-man? The same who filled his disciples with the Spirit to utter the words found in the following verses: 1 Kings 18:27; Psalm 2:4, 37:12; proverbs 1:26; Isaiah 1; Jeremiah 4:22, 10:8, 14; Malachi 2:1-3; Philippians 3:1-2; 2 Peter 2:12, 22; Revelation 22:15? That same one? And the same one who chided persistent blasphemers like you in Matthew 23:13-39 and Luke 11:37-51? That same one?

      You are just like your father since he too selectively quoted scripture to Jesus, your God and Judge, who was then put in his place like you by interrogating scripture in light of scripture, not put scripture against scripture, like you and your father like to do.

      Like

  17. Lets focus back on the topic of the thread.

    Again, just reading Isaiah shows that the perfect (past tense) verses were wrongly to the future so as to be convenient for a prophesy.

    This is wicked and needs to be called out and remembered until every Christian bible corrects itself.

    At the most, it can be put in the commentary as a possible (even that is wrong as the explanation again below).

    And reading Isaiah 9 and the chapters before and after it makes it crystal clear that it is about the moral degeneration of the Children of Israel and the punishment in the form of the Assyrian army and so on including the miraculous help of God when the people repented under the righteous Israeli king, Hezekiah.

    This is all as expected as the very first of Isaiah says it is about:

    “The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.”

    Anyone can confirm it themselves:

    http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt1009.htm

    Like

  18. Sammy, what’s this deranged reference to ‘my father’ you keep on harping on about!!!???? Huh??!! Please clarify?? You sound crazier than usual!

    And Omar, we’re having so much fun!! 😜

    Like

  19. “do not return insult for insult, evil for evil, but instead, give a blessing . . . ” 1 Peter 3:9

    “never pay back evil for evil to anyone.” Romans 12:17

    “never take your own vengeance . . . ” Romans 12:19

    These are clear commands to us as NT believers.

    But the verses you use are examples of God, prophets, Jesus, and apostles who call people what they are, and they actually knew their opponents hearts (God and Jesus does; and apparently He gave spiritual insight to the apostles and prophets for that); but we are not apostles or prophets; and they did not make a mistake. We could make mistakes by judging motives.

    Besides, it is not the method of evangelism in the NT.

    I Peter 3:15 – “. . . ready to give an answer . . . with gentleness and respect”

    Ephesians 4:15 – “speaking the truth in love”

    and only God can convert someone in their heart. (1 Corinthians 1:18-2:5)

    It does not matter if my method does not win anyone; obedience to the proper methods of talking to people is the point. Even if no one comes to know the Lord, we are still to obey God and treat people with respect.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Now let’s balance out Ken’s selective citation of the Bible, shall we? Here goes , taken from one of my articles:

      What makes this rather sad is that this very hypocrite and liar, Zawadi, knows of all this and yet attacks me when I respond to these very same blasphemers in like manner, in a manner which they deserve, one which is in line with the teachings of the prophets and apostles. After all, the Bible does say that God mocks the unbelievers:

      “Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers gather together against the LORD and against his Anointed One. ‘Let us break their chains,’ they say, and throw off their fetters.’ The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord scoffs at them. Psalm 2:1-4

      “but the Lord laughs at the wicked, for he knows their day is coming.” Psalm 37:13

      “Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; at the head of the noisy streets she cries out; at the entrance of the city gates she speaks: ‘How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple? How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing and fools hate knowledge? If you turn at my reproof, behold, I will pour out my spirit to you; I will make my words known to you. Because I have called and you refused to listen, have stretched out my hand and no one has heeded, because you have ignored all my counsel and would have none of my reproof, I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when terror strikes you,” Proverbs 1:20-26

      This, perhaps, explains the prophet Elijah’s mocking the false prophets of Baal, since he was only imitating Yahweh his God at this point:

      “So Ahab sent to all the people of Israel and gathered the prophets together at Mount Carmel. And Elijah came near to all the people and said, ‘How long will you go limping between two different opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.’ And the people did not answer him a word. Then Elijah said to the people, ‘I, even I only, am left a prophet of the LORD, but Baal’s prophets are 450 men. Let two bulls be given to us, and let them choose one bull for themselves and cut it in pieces and lay it on the wood, but put no fire to it. And I will prepare the other bull and lay it on the wood and put no fire to it. And you call upon the name of your god, and I will call upon the name of the LORD, and the God who answers by fire, he is God.’ And all the people answered, ‘It is well spoken.’ Then Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, ‘Choose for yourselves one bull and prepare it first, for you are many, and call upon the name of your god, but put no fire to it.’ And they took the bull that was given them, and they prepared it and called upon the name of Baal from morning until noon, saying, ‘O Baal, answer us!’ But there was no voice, and no one answered. And they limped around the altar that they had made. And at noon Elijah MOCKED THEM, saying, ‘Cry aloud, for he is a god. Either he is musing, OR HE IS RELIEVING HIMSELF, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.’ And they cried aloud and cut themselves after their custom with swords and lances, until the blood gushed out upon them. And as midday passed, they raved on until the time of the offering of the oblation, but there was no voice. No one answered; no one paid attention.” 1 Kings 18:20-29

      Some of the prophets even called people stupid and foolish!

      “For my people are foolish; they know me not; they are stupid children; they have no understanding. They are ‘wise’—in doing evil! But how to do good they know not.” Jeremiah 4:22

      “They are both stupid and foolish; the instruction of idols is but wood! … Every man is stupid and without knowledge; every goldsmith is put to shame by his idols, for his images are false, and there is no breath in them.” Jeremiah 10:8, 14

      Moreover, the Lord Jesus himself and his apostles did not hesitate to insult those who deserved it:

      “When Jesus had finished speaking, a Pharisee invited him to eat with him; so he went in and reclined at the table. But the Pharisee, noticing that Jesus did not first wash before the meal, was surprised. Then the Lord said to him, ‘Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness. You foolish people! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also? But give what is inside the dish to the poor, and everything will be clean for you. Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone. Woe to you Pharisees, because you love the most important seats in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. Woe to you, because you are like unmarked graves, which men walk over without knowing it.’ One of the experts in the law answered him, ‘Teacher, when you say these things, you insult us also.’ Jesus replied, ‘And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them. Woe to you, because you build tombs for the prophets, and it was your forefathers who killed them. So you testify that you approve of what your forefathers did; they killed the prophets, and you build their tombs. Because of this, God in his wisdom said, “I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and others they will persecute.” Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all. Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering.’ When Jesus left there, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law began to oppose him fiercely and to besiege him with questions, waiting to catch him in something he might say.” Luke 11:37-54

      Even though one of the teachers of the law informed the Lord that his comments were hurtful and insulting he still went ahead to rebuke them rather harshly.

      The Apostle Paul called the Judaizers, or Jews who were preaching a false Gospel, dogs:

      “Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil, those mutilators of the flesh. For it is we who are the circumcision, we who worship by the Spirit of God, who glory in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh—” Philippians 3:2-3

      Moreover, here is how this blessed Apostle treated a sorcerer who opposed and sought to hinder the spread of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ:

      “When they had gone through the whole island as far as Paphos, they came upon a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet named Bar-Jesus. He was with the proconsul, Sergius Paulus, a man of intelligence, who summoned Barnabas and Saul and sought to hear the word of God. But Elymas the magician (for that is the meaning of his name opposed them, seeking to turn the proconsul away from the faith. But Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him and said, ‘You son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, full of all deceit and villainy, will you not stop making crooked the straight paths of the Lord? And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you, and you will be blind and unable to see the sun for a time.’ Immediately mist and darkness fell upon him, and he went about seeking people to lead him by the hand. Then the proconsul believed, when he saw what had occurred, for he was astonished at the teaching of the Lord.” Acts 13:6-12

      And Peter likened apostate and heretical Christians to animals, dogs and swine:

      “But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish… They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity—for a man is a slave to whatever has mastered him. If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. Of them the proverbs are true: ‘A dog returns to its vomit,’ and, ‘A sow that is washed goes back to her wallowing in the mud.’” 2 Peter 2:12, 19-22

      In this the apostles were imitating the language of the Lord Jesus:

      “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.” Matthew 7:6

      What all of these examples prove is that it is simply not true that mocking and insulting one’s opponent is unbiblical or unchristian. Even though the Holy Bible says that Christians generally should be gracious in the way they speak, and not return insult for insult:

      “Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’ To the contrary, ‘if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” Romans 12:17-21

      “Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.” Colossians 4:6

      Yet, as the above examples demonstrate, it also allows for exceptions to this general rule of Christian conduct. Otherwise we would have to believe that Jesus, the apostles, and the prophets were all acting in an unchristian manner!

      As the book of Ecclesiastes states:

      “There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under heaven: a time to be born and a time to die, a time to plant and a time to uproot, a time to kill and a time to heal, a time to tear down and a time to build, a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance, a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them, a time to embrace and a time to refrain, a time to search and a time to give up, a time to keep and a time to throw away, a time to tear and a time to mend, a time to be silent and a time to speak, a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace.” Ecclesiastes 3:1-8

      Like

    • I’m relieved that virtually no serious Christian theologians agree with you Sam.

      Liked by 4 people

    • One key of the rules of interpretation is to distinguish between Historical Narrative vs. Teaching /Didactic sections. those are all historical narrative of what God said, Jesus and apostles did.

      They are not Teaching sections giving us direct commands to obey.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Yeah!!!! You tell him Ken, St Sam will be feeling that one for sure!!!

      Liked by 3 people

    • So Ken since I just exposed your myopic reading of Scripture you need to now repent of misleading people into thinking you are in obedience to Scrupture whereas we who take a different approach do not. In fact I challenge to try and address these texts that I presented to balance out your skewed reading of the Bible so we see how well you do defending your myopic reading of the Bible. Besides I am having final Jacob’s expense exposing him for what he truly is.

      And Ken, great job of turning attention away from the point of this post. I see why the Muslins here love you so much.

      Like

    • I already destroyed your arguments on the issue.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Note how ken’s key rule means that quoting Jesus in the Gospels such as loving your enemy is misplaced since that is not from a didactic portion of scripture but biography and therefore means it is irrelevant for our application as Christians. And his rule ignores the fact that I didn’t merely quote biography or historical narrative cut the whole plethora of Scripture. And to show you how sled his key rule is the mosaic is sandwiched within historical narrative and yet no one seriously thinks that the commands and instructions were not relevant and meaningful for the people of God. Besides isn’t the command to make disciples of all nations and teaching to obey Jesus’ commands found in a biography? And what commands did Matthew expect his followers to obey if not those found in his account? Truly a pathetic method of interpreting Scripture.

      Thanks again Ken for proving my point about your myopic reading of Scripture.

      Like

    • You mean I just humiliated you for perverting the Scriptures to your shame and humiliation. So thank you for allowing me to expose you for all to see Ken. Much appreciated. Like I said, you are very useful for the cause of Mubammad and his followers. 🙂

      Now pretend to be a Christisn apologist and get back to refuting Singer.

      Like

    • LOL; I am not humiliated nor did I pervert the Scriptures. I feel no shame at all. Do you think that style of bombast is really effective?

      It is you that God calls you to be a good and holy witness and do better.

      Liked by 5 people

    • I have several Jewish Messianic friends (they believe Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah and Son of God, atonement, and God in the flesh)

      I will never forget, with 2 of them, we were witnessing, and a Jewish lady came up to us wearing a “Enjoy Torah” T-shirt written in the style of the “Enjoy Coke-a-Cola” insignia; and she said, “I just came here to refute you”; so I asked her, “You believe in the Torah right, and the sacrifices in the tabernacle and then in the temple as atonement for sin in the TaNakh, right?” She said “yes”. so I asked her, “why do you think the Almighty God allowed the Romans to destroy the temple in 70 AD, so that the Jews have not been able to sacrifice and obey the Torah since that time?” She got mad and grunted and ran away. She could not deal with that basic historical fact.

      Like

    • Williams no smiles or likes for me? I thought we were pals? 😂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sam don’t you have another article that nobody will read to write up? Those crickets aren’t going to entertain themselves 😉

      Liked by 4 people

    • Patrice,

      Good burn on Sam I am. I made a mental note to never get on your bad side.😉

      Liked by 3 people

  20. Oh no, another incoherent, mind-numbingly long cut and paste rant from sammy!!! You really need to be concise, sammy!

    Ken, I’m really warming to you! Keep up this gentle, compassionate preaching, you actually may get a Muslim on this blog to switch sides!!! LOL!!
    😜😂😂

    Liked by 2 people

  21. The question for Rabbi Singer and others like him, who believe in a future Messiah, who will be a descendent of David, is if Hezekiah fulfilled all of what Isaiah 9 says, why do they still believe in a future Messiah?

    And why did the Jews all through history develop their idea of the Messiah, who would be a descendent of David, and be called the Son of God (Psalm 2:1-12; Proverbs 30:4) continue to develop the doctrine of the Messiah as future, when a king that they thought at the time fulfilled it; but then did not?

    And why did the Jewish leaders ask Jesus the question they did at His trial, which clearly shows that thought that the Messiah would also be “the Son of God” ?

    “Tell us, are you the Messiah, the Son of God?” Or “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One” ?

    Mark 14:60-64

    Matthew 26:63-66

    Like

    • The Jews will have a very simple answer….King Hezekiah did not do a lot of the things that the Messiah is expected in other parts of the scripture to do….no Jew thinks King Hezekiah was the Messiah.

      Thus, no, it is not an appropriate question.

      Like

    • Even they (The Jews) see a kind of double fulfillment – one near (David, Solomon, Hezekiah, etc.) and one far into the future (the Messiah to come)

      Like

    • People are obsessing of the messiah to come and prophecy and interpretations of what it could possibly mean. What they fail to realise is that the prophets they should worry about already came and gave a complete message vindicated by the seal of the prophets (Mohammed SAWS). How about looking back at the true teachings of Moses, Jesus (Peace and blessings be upon them) etc rather than waiting for someone else to come and rescue them. They are in for a big surprise when they do come…

      Like

  22. And please, someone explain why sam keeps referenceing ‘my father’ , just don’t get it??!!😩😳

    Like

  23. Thanks Ken!!
    Oh naughty sammy, there you go with the insults again!!

    Liked by 2 people

  24. And Ken, great job of turning attention away from the point of this post. I see why the Muslins here love you so much.

    I think you turned the subject away, by putting insults and ad hominem into your otherwise good content. You did it to yourself my friend.

    I have seen before, many times, that they focus on your insults instead of the content of your argumentation.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yes “they” do because insults put people off. Basic psychology. Sam has yet to learn this.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Isn’t he just following the example of his lord and master Jesus? Did Jesus not insult the Canaanite women who came for help?

      Matthew 15:25-27: The Faith of the Canaanite Woman
      -25: The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
      -26: But Jesus replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.”
      -27: “Yes, Lord,” she said, “even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”…

      So Sam is being a “Good” Christian by following the example of the corrupt and false scriptures.

      I am already looking forward to your excuses on this one. So which will it be this time?

      1) It’s A parable (a great Christian go to)
      2) You need the be possessed by the holy spirit to understand it
      3) Islam is from the devil (Just because)
      4) Any number of diversion tactics

      Looing forward to your lies… Sorry I mean replies

      Like

    • Here is an article about Jesus’ interaction with the Canaanite woman. The key is you have to study the passage in it’s larger context and that Jesus was testing the disciples to see if they understood the lesson about the human heart, that the human heart is full of pride, which includes racial pride and prejudice; which the Jews had against the pagan cultures, particularly the Canaanites.
      Mark 7:20-23 comes right before the encounter with the Canaanite women in Mark 7.

      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2014/10/03/was-jesus-cruel-to-the-canaanite-woman-mark-724-30-matthew-1521-28/

      Like

  25. The question for Rabbi Singer and others like him, who believe in a future Messiah, who will be a descendent of David, is if Hezekiah fulfilled all of what Isaiah 9 says, why do they still believe in a future Messiah?

    And why did the Jews all through history develop their idea of the Messiah, who would be a descendent of David, and be called the Son of God (Psalm 2:1-12; Proverbs 30:4) continue to develop the doctrine of the Messiah as future, when a king that they thought at the time fulfilled it; but then did not?

    And why did the Jewish leaders ask Jesus the question they did at His trial, which clearly shows that thought that the Messiah would also be “the Son of God” ?

    “Tell us, are you the Messiah, the Son of God?” Or “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One” ?

    Mark 14:60-64

    Matthew 26:63-66

    Like

  26. I have several Jewish Messianic friends (they believe Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah and Son of God, atonement, and God in the flesh)

    I will never forget, with 2 of them, we were witnessing, and a Jewish lady came up to us wearing a “Enjoy Torah” T-shirt written in the style of the “Enjoy Coke-a-Cola” insignia; and she said, “I just came here to refute you”; so I asked her, “You believe in the Torah right, and the sacrifices in the tabernacle and then in the temple as atonement for sin in the TaNakh, right?” She said “yes”. so I asked her, “why do you think the Almighty God allowed the Romans to destroy the temple in 70 AD, so that the Jews have not been able to sacrifice and obey the Torah since that time?” She got mad and grunted and ran away. She could not deal with that basic historical fact.

    Like

  27. Besides isn’t the command to make disciples of all nations and teaching to obey Jesus’ commands found in a biography?

    I did not say that a whole book (your “biography”) is only historical narrative. The command of Jesus in Matthew 28:19 is a command for us as applicable today.

    And what commands did Matthew expect his followers to obey if not those found in his account? Truly a pathetic method of interpreting Scripture.

    No; you don’t seem to understand context of sections and historical narrative (what happened) vs. commands and teachings.

    For example,
    Matthew 5, 6 and 7 are teaching sections, applicable to us; they are not historical narrative genre.

    You have yet to show a text that shows we are to imitate God or Jesus by insults, in evangelism.

    The over-riding emphasis of the NT is on loving our enemies and not returning evil for evil or insult for insult.

    Liked by 2 people

  28. Rabbi Singer claims that the text in Isaiah 9 is only about Hezekiah, but all Jewish theology about the Messiah is about a descendent of David who will come in the future and bring peace. When that descendent failed to fulfill it; the idea was expanded to be that there is a fufillment at the time of the prophesy, for example, Psalm 2 is about David, but it is also about the future Messiah, because He will expand to be victorious over the whole world – Psalm 2:8-12 – He is drawing some from all nations to Himself; and those that don’t repent (verses 10-12) will be broken like clay pots (verse 9).

    The Reign of the Lord’s Messiah (“Anointed One”)

    1 Why are the nations in an uproar
    And the peoples devising a vain thing?

    2 The kings of the earth take their stand
    And the rulers take counsel together
    Against the Lord and against His Messiah (Anointed one), saying,

    3 “Let us tear their fetters apart
    And cast away their cords from us!”

    4 He who sits in the heavens laughs,
    The Lord scoffs at them.

    5 Then He will speak to them in His anger
    And terrify them in His fury, saying,

    6 “But as for Me, I have installed My King
    Upon Zion, My holy mountain.”

    7 “I will surely tell of the decree of the Lord:
    He said to Me, ‘You are My Son,
    Today I have begotten You.

    8 ‘Ask of Me, and I will surely give the nations as Your inheritance,
    And the very ends of the earth as Your possession.

    9 ‘You shall break them with a rod of iron,
    You shall shatter them like earthenware.’”

    10 Now therefore, O kings, show discernment;
    Take warning, O judges of the earth.

    11 Worship the Lord with reverence
    And rejoice with trembling.

    12 Do homage to the Son, that He not become angry, and you perish in the way,
    For His wrath may soon be kindled.
    How blessed are all who take refuge in Him!

    Like

    • No, you are as usual smuggling in your ideological wishes into the text…Eisegesis.

      More than one leader can do great things…thus, just because King Hezekiah was a great leader, it does not negate other future great leaders.

      Watch his video again…let’s stop getting into distractions…it is clear that words were deliberately mistranslated for an ideological purpose and doing such with God’s word is wicked.

      It is crystal clear that Isaiah 9 is about King Hezekiah. May God greatly reward King Hezekiah in paradise for his efforts in persuading those under his rule to repent to God.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Then why did the Rabbis in the Targums say that the passage was about the Messiah to come in the future to them, even after Hezekiah’s death? The Jews continued to take many passages about David and a son of David as about a future Messiah.

      Like

  29. Liking Ken more and more! Although Still disagree with 95% of what he says! Lol

    Does sammy have any friends??! What happens when he disagrees with them? Does he start calling them names??!

    And what about sammy’s home life?! I dread to think. So if your wife disagrees with you on something, sammy ( as couples tend to do , 😜), do you respond same as usual, ‘you can lying deceitful woman!’, ‘daughter of satan’, etc!!

    Like

  30. Sam is great entertainment, really he is. I can picture Sam wearing camel hair with a leather belt , eating locust and wild honey, shouting obscenities in his mirror, cursing and condemning the world to hell.

    Liked by 4 people

  31. I care for all people…I care far more that Sam saves himself from hellfire than being entertained.

    If I value entertainment, I would want him to continue…but I value him being protected from punishment of hell and for him to instead get the rewards and generosity from God.

    Thus, I don’t enjoy seeing him covering up the truth to fulfill his pleasures of keeping to his sectarian identity in following Paul in his theory of Jesus (peace be upon him) as dying for criminals and his following the Trinity that was devised long after Paul.

    Not that you would not want the best for him as well, biblicalmonotheist.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Wow, I am actually starting to like Ken! I mean besides some his garbage arguments against Islam, you really have to hand it to him for some of the posts above.

    Liked by 2 people

  33. Notice what shamoun is saying,he’s saying it’s okay to mock and ridicule those who deserve it even without any provocation. Sam even quotes from the Bible to justify it, but hypocritically attacks Prophet Muhammad for allegedly provoking the hostility against the Quraysh by slandering their gods. Shamoun clearly believes in antagonizing the enemy but hypocritically attacks Muhammad for supposedly insulting the Quraysh. This is clear double standards, it’s okay to attack the enemy verbally according to shamoun interpretation of the Bible,but when the Prophet Muhammad did the same against his enemy he attacks him. Bassam Zawadi rebuttex Sams article, about who antagonized whom

    Liked by 2 people

    • The Debate Machine

      On the thread about Nabeel Quraish’s ailment, while Muslims are praying for Nabeel who had lies upon lies about Islam, Sam Shamoun was mocking and insulting Sheikh Ahmad Deedat for his cancer. Sam Shomoun himself has a serious disease that can kill him abruptly but he does not care about it.

      Sam Shamoun once insulted this blog owner saying to him “Why did Allah not heal you” just forgetting he Sam Shamoun has serious sickness.

      On the thread about Nabeels cancer, Sam Shamoun praised the owner of this blog for showing love, mercy and forgiveness for the sick(Nabeel and others) even if he does not agree with them and he said that is good.

      Just the next paragraph, Shamoun did not show love, mercy and forgiveness to Sheikh Ahmad Deedat cancer that had taken his life.

      Ahmad Deedat and all Muslims are tested in this world like Prophet Abraham. Muslims are tested with sickness of various forms like cancer, ssd, diabetes, fever, etc. and with either riches, poor, in between to let them be more faithful to their God and say “Everything is by Allah” . Ahmad Deedat has passed the test InshaAllah as some of his Christian friends tried to convert him in that state, and he told them he will die a Muslim in whatever state. Ahmad Deedat, we Muslims knows he is in Jannat Firdaus(paradise).

      A prophet of God, is it Ayub? was sick for years with maggots coming out of his body and he still kept his faith in God and so many people are still being tested in various ways. We Muslims still keep worshiping our one God no matter what .

      Sam Shamoun sees Muslims sickness as punishment but he forgot he himself(Shamoun) has a very serious sickness that can abruptly end his life and he does not consider it punishment. After all Jesus died for your sins Mr. Shamoun and gave you peace and happiness, what is this disease you have for?

      May be you need to who Jesus is.

      Thanks.

      Thanks.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Sham Shamoron claims that he can “mock the disbelievers” as “God mocked them”. This is exactly the root cause of his issue. Visions of grandeur and conflating himself with what God can do. God can create life from nothing, can you do that as well sham? He thinks he is God. And why not, if God can become a man why can’t Sham be a God to. The only problem is where do we squeeze him into the trinity? I am sure he will come up with a way.

      He literally is that arrogant he thinks he is a god.

      Like

  34. Shamoun is mentally ill with a twisted intellect that is only good for writing worthless articles filled with hijacking, manipulation and exploitation of the Islamic texts by reading through a tunnel vision and foreign Christian lens. Shamoun is a hatemonger and intellectual mischief maker like Wood, he invades the Scriptures with his own false interpretations but handles his own scriptures with gentleness and care. Sam has no credentials and qualifications to critique the Islamic faith. He also decontextualizes the Quranic verses and depends on sources that Muslim scholars don’t deem to be reliable, namely Ibn Ishaq and Tabari. As a matter of fact Shamoun distorts his own scriptures because he’s deducing laws from texts most Christians deem to be historical and biographical narratives, which is exactly how Muslim scholars view the Prophet biography (Seerah) which is distinguished from the Sunnah. Not everything found in the Seerah is tantamount to extracting laws from those texts because many sayings were uttered at specific moments and circumstances that no longer apply. But shamoun accepts everything as gospel truth and doesn’t care about the difference between weak and sound reports,only if it’s something seemingly damaging to the Prophet, whose Detailed Judgment Day signs
    ns are being fulfilled today.

    Liked by 3 people

  35. Guess it’s about time I join the conversation. Can’t stand the distortions and attempted justifications of Ken Temple.
    To begin with, the logic behind the defence of matthew 15 (Jesus vs the canaanite woman) is quite unreasonable. From all my brain could gather, it goes along the line ‘to prove a wrong (behaviour), commit/do the wrong’. Quite funny. I bet we could justify Bn Laden and Timothy McVeigh via a similar logic.

    The question ‘Why did God allow the 2nd temple to fall?’ isn’t a difficult one at all. I’m surprised you claim your jewish friend could not answer it.
    Anyway, a second look at the events of 70AD will reveal actual reasons. Jews revolted against the state and lost the second temple as they did (lost) the first. Unless pre-conceived, no connection seems to exist between an event which happened in 33AD and this loss. An attempted one like yours will not explain the 37 year gap.
    Wondering if the earliest christians believed in the sacrifice ‘folktale’. The writer of Acts says they adhered too temple sacrifices and even forced Paul to do carry out one.

    I have not finished reading all you wrote. Will respond to your other points when I do.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: