[google28b52e0868d1e307.html]

Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Rabbi Tovia Singer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rabbi Tovia Singer. Show all posts

Friday 28 October 2022

RABBI TOVIA SINGER'S CHALLENGE TO CHRISTIANS: THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD (ISAIAH 7:14)

 (12) Outraged Christian Calls Rabbi Tovia Singer the Antichrist! - YouTube

Rabbi Singer challenges Christians to "take a moment and look it up for yourselves" regarding the claim that Mary was indeed a virgin. In Christian parlance, this equates to testing the spirits or emulating the Bereans. (1 John 4:1; Acts 17:11). 

Singer's assertion: Matthew deliberately altered the Hebrew bible in order to make it appear Christological. He changed Isaiah 7:14 which refers to the virgin. 

Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14).

The Hebrew word under discussion is הָעַלְמָ֗ה  hā-‘al-māh - Strongs: 5959 [e] 
הָעַלְמָ֗ה can be translated a young woman, a virgin. {1}

Unfortunately, I do not know Hebrew, but I have looked up הָעַלְמָ֗ה in several lexicons and commentaries.  

Brown-Driver-Briggs: עַלְמָה noun feminine young woman (ripe sexually; maid or newly married); — ׳ע Genesis 24:43 (J), Exodus 2:8 (E), Proverbs 30:19; Isaiah 7:14; plural עֲלָמוֺת Psalm 68:26; Songs 1:3; Songs 6:8; עַלעֲֿלָמוֺת to (the voice of) young women, either literally, or of soprano or falsetto of boys: 1 Chronicles 15:20; Psalm 9:1 (read עַלעֲֿלָמוֺת לַבֵּן [for עַלמֿוּת לַבֵּן], 'voce virginea a pueris decantandum,' Thes), Psalm 46:1; Psalm 48:15 (read עַלעֲֿלָמוֺת [for עַלמֿוּת]; translated probably to Psalm 49:1). {1} 

The word עלמה ‛almâh is derived from the verb עלם ‛âlam, "to conceal, to hide, to cover." {2} This word properly interpreted means a girl, a maiden, a virgin an unmarried young woman of marriageable age. It occurs only seven times in the Old Testament (Isaiah 7:16Exodus 2:8Psalm 68:25Song of Solomon  1:3, 6:8; Proverbs 30:19. It is applied to Rebecca in Genesis 24:43, to Miriam in Exodus 2:8 and to the maidens in Psalm 68:25. Interestingly Rebecca is referred to as a virgin (bethulah) in Genesis 24:16 and also as a young woman/maiden (almah) in Genesis 24:43. It therefore appears that bethulah and almah are interchangeable terms. 

Isaiah 7:14 requires us to understand Mary as a young Jewish woman who was legally pledged to, but not yet married to Joseph. She was regarded as a virgin by default. Given the time and culture referred to, a young unmarried Jewish woman or a girl would necessarily be a virgin.
 
Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit. And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us). (Matthew 1:18-23).

Singer goes on to quote Genesis 3:15: And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed. זֶרַע zera` (zeh'-rah) = a sowing, seed, offspring {3} Singer interprets her seed as the seed of Eve i.e. her children, her progeny, her offspring. In context we are looking at two seeds; the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman. The seed of the serpent denotes the wicked. In contrast, her seed i.e. her offspring, is principally identified as Christ. (Galatians 3:16; Galatians 3:19). Zera (seed) is sometimes singular as in Genesis 4:25 when it refers to Seth. There is therefore no problem in translating zera in the singular and identifying Christ as the seed.

Nineteenth-century German theologians Carl Friedrich Keil and Franz Delitzsch are held in very high esteem as Old Testament scholars and Hebrew experts. The following is an excerpt from their commentary on Genesis 3.

"Observe, too, that although in the first clause the seed of the serpent is opposed to the seed of the woman, in the second it is not over the seed of the serpent but over the serpent itself that the victory is said to be gained. It, i.e., the seed of the woman will crush thy head, and thou (not thy seed) wilt crush its heel. Thus the seed of the serpent is hidden behind the unity of the serpent, or rather of the foe who, through the serpent, has done such injury to man. This foe is Satan, who incessantly opposes the seed of the woman and bruises its heel, but is eventually to be trodden under its feet. It does not follow from this, however, apart from other considerations, that by the seed of the woman we are to understand one solitary person, one individual only. As the woman is the mother of all living (Genesis 3:20), her seed, to which the victory over the serpent and its seed is promised, must be the human race. But if a direct and exclusive reference to Christ appears to be exegetically untenable, the allusion in the word to Christ is by no means precluded in consequence. In itself the idea of זרע, the seed, is an indefinite one, since the posterity of a man may consist of a whole tribe or of one son only (Genesis 4:25; Genesis 21:12-13), and on the other hand, an entire tribe may be reduced to one single descendant and become extinct in him. The question, therefore, who is to be understood by the "seed" which is to crush the serpent's head, can only be answered from the history of the human race. But a point of much greater importance comes into consideration here. Against the natural serpent the conflict may be carried on by the whole human race, by all who are born of a woman, but not against Satan. As he is a fore who can only be met with spiritual weapons, none can encounter him successfully but such as possess and make use of spiritual arms. Hence the idea of the "seed" is modified by the nature of the foe. If we look at the natural development of the human race, Eve bore three sons, but only one of them, viz., Seth, was really the seed by whom the human family was preserved through the flood and perpetuated in Noah: so, again, of the three sons of Noah, Shem, the blessed of Jehovah, from whom Abraham descended, was the only one in whose seed all nations were to be blessed, and that not through Ishmael, but through Isaac alone. Through these constantly repeated acts of divine selection, which were not arbitrary exclusions, but were rendered necessary by differences in the spiritual condition of the individuals concerned, the "seed," to which the victory over Satan was promised, was spiritually or ethically determined, and ceased to be co-extensive with physical descent. This spiritual seed culminated in Christ, in whom the Adamitic family terminated, henceforward to be renewed by Christ as the second Adam, and restored by Him to its original exaltation and likeness to God. In this sense Christ is the seed of the woman, who tramples Satan under His feet, not as an individual, but as the head both of the posterity of the woman which kept the promise and maintained the conflict with the old serpent before His advent, and also of all those who are gathered out of all nations, are united to Him by faith, and formed into one body of which He is the head (Romans 16:20). On the other hand, all who have not regarded and preserved the promise, have fallen into the power of the old serpent, and are to be regarded as the seed of the serpent, whose head will be trodden under foot (Matthew 23:33; John 8:44; 1 John 3:8). If then the promise culminates in Christ, the fact that the victory over the serpent is promised to the posterity of the woman, not of the man, acquires this deeper significance, that as it was through the woman that the craft of the devil brought sin and death into the world, so it is also through the woman that the grace of God will give to the fallen human race the conqueror of sin, of death, and of the devil. And even if the words had reference first of all to the fact that the woman had been led astray by the serpent, yet in the fact that the destroyer of the serpent was born of a woman (without a human father) they were fulfilled in a way which showed that the promise must have proceeded from that Being, who secured its fulfilment not only in its essential force, but even in its apparently casual form." {4}

To sum up the context of Isaiah 7:1-9:7: Isaiah predicts the failure of the Syrio-Israelitish invasion of Judah and the fatal results of Judah's alliance (through Ahaz) with Assyria. The text moves forward to the distant future prophecy concerning the certainty of final preservation and the coming of the Messiah. 

Clarke: "But how could that be a sign to Ahaz which was to take place so many hundreds of years after? I answer, the meaning of the prophet is plain: not only Rezin and Pekah should be unsuccessful against Jerusalem at that time, which was the fact; but Jerusalem, Judea, and the house of David should be both preserved, notwithstanding their depressed state, and the multitude of their adversaries, till the time should come when a Virgin should bear a son. This is a most remarkable circumstance the house of David could never fail, till a virgin should conceive and bear a son - nor did it: but when that incredible and miraculous fact did take place, the kingdom and house of David became extinct! This is an irrefragable confutation of every argument a Jew can offer in vindication of his opposition to the Gospel of Christ. Either the prophecy in Isaiah has been fulfilled, or the kingdom and house of David are yet standing. But the kingdom of David, we know, is destroyed: and where is the man, Jew or Gentile, that can show us a single descendant of David on the face of the earth? The prophecy could not fail: the kingdom and house of David have failed; the virgin, therefore, must have brought forth her son, and this son is Jesus, the Christ. Thus Moses, Isaiah, and Matthew concur; and facts the most unequivocal have confirmed the whole! Behold the wisdom and providence of God!" {5}

Jesus necessarily had to be born of a virgin so that He would not inherit the sinful nature of fallen humanity. It was Adam, not Eve, who passed sin on to their descendants. (Romans 5:12). Jesus' miraculous conception by the power of the Spirit is an essential doctrine of the church. The New Testament can meet any challenge to its claim of authenticity and scriptural authority. (1 John 4:6). 

I would advise everyone, not only Christians, to be very wary indeed of Tovia Singer's doctrine. The caller did not identify Singer as "the Antichrist" with the article, he said "antichrist" in general terms. (1 John 2:18, 4:2-3). A person who calls the apostles "liars" and who refers to the gospels a"garbage in garbage out" should expect a strong response from Jesus' followers.

1. Strong's Hebrew: 5959. עַלְמָה (almah) -- a young woman, a virgin (biblehub.com)
2. Isaiah 7:14 Commentaries: "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel. (biblehub.com)
3. Strong's Hebrew: 2233. זָ֫רַע (zera) -- a sowing, seed, offspring (biblehub.com)
4. Genesis 3 Keil and Delitzsch OT Commentary (biblehub.com)
5. Isaiah 7 Clarke's Commentary (biblehub.com)

Wednesday 26 October 2022

RABBI TOVIA SINGER'S DISTORTION OF THE SCRIPTURES

 (5) Christian Zionism, is it possible? With Rabbi Tovia Singer - YouTube

American Orthodox Rabbi Tovia Singer is a fierce advocate for the Jewish faith, the Jewish people, and the State of Israel. Singer moved from Indonesia to Jerusalem in May 2019 and he now lives in the Jewish quarter of the Old City. He is the founder and director of Outreach Judaism, an international organization that responds directly to the issues raised by missionaries and cults, by exploring Judaism in contradistinction to fundamentalist Christianity. {1} Singer is the author of Let’s Get Biblical! Why Doesn’t Judaism Accept the Christian Messiah? 

The interviewer, Dr Roi Yozevitch, observed that an Israeli-loving Christian is an oxymoron from the Jewish point of view. This is mainly due to the historic persecution of Jews by the so-called church. A major obstacle for the Jewish people is historical antisemitism and the accusation that they are "Christ murderers". From the fundamental Christian point of view, we know that God has not rejected his people as some teach. According to the apostle Paul, at the present time, there is a remnant chosen by grace. (Romans 11: 1-12).

As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all. (Romans 11:28-32).

Yozevitch informed his viewers that Orthodox Jews are not allowed to read, or even to have a copy of the New Testament in their homes. We should be under no illusion that Orthodox Jews are an easy group to evangelize; on the contrary, they present a united front and are extremely hostile to the gospel.

Singer is confident and convincing, but he misrepresents the scriptural position on a number of key doctrines. In this post, I will limit my critique to Singer's misrepresentation of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ as "ritual cannibalism".  

Singer: "Christians teach in the eucharist that you have to eat the body and drink the blood of the messiah Jesus through eating the bread and drinking the wine..  ..to the Christian, when you eat the body and drink the blood, literally Christ dwells in you and you become Christ-like.. it is all about worshipping a God-man who died for your sins and resurrected from the dead, and if you believe in that and his body and blood dwell in you then you are saved and you gain the properties of Christ.. This is what is called ritual cannibalism.."

Singer omits to clarify the parabolic element of Jesus' teaching and his distortions are no doubt repulsive to his Jewish audience. Fundamental bible believing Christians do not believe that when they take communion they are literally ingesting the body and blood of Christ, or that his body and blood literally dwell in them. Realism i.e. the real or physical presence of Jesus in the communion i.e. transubstantiation and its variant, consubstantiation, is generally rejected by fundamental Christians. The doctrine held by many Christians is that the bread and wine consumed in communion are symbolic of the body and blood of Jesus. The elements are a remembrance of the atonement Jesus made for our sins on the cross: Do this in remembrance of me - literally, as My memorial, or, as your memorial of Me. (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24).

The New Testament scriptures teach that it is by grace through faith that people are saved, not by any outward observance. (Ephesians 2:8). When the bread and wine are taken, we do not believe that we are taking into ourselves the essence or the "life force" of Jesus into our bodies.  Believers receive the Holy Spirit when they believe the gospel of Jesus Christ. (Galatians 3:2; Acts 20:21; John 6:63).

Truly, truly, I tell you, he who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that anyone may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And this bread, which I will give for the life of the world, is My flesh.”At this, the Jews began to argue among themselves, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?”So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is real food, and My blood is real drink. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood remains in Me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent Me and I live because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on Me will live because of Me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your fathers, who ate the manna and died, the one who eats this bread will live forever. Jesus said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum. 
When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. So Jesus said to the twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?” Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” (John 6:47-68).

This graphic metaphor caused no small controversy amongst the Jews: ..they began to argue among themselves.. After this many turned back and no longer walked with him. This speech had the effect of weeding out Jesus' superficial followers. His habit was to explain the deeper meaning of his sayings to the twelve privately. (Mark 4:34).

On other occasions, Jesus said, I am the light of the world (John 8:12), I am the good shepherd (John 10: 11,14),  I am the vine (John 15:1), I am the door. (John 10:9).

This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. (Matthew 13:13).


For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas and then to the Twelve. After that, He appeared to more than five hundred brothers at once, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles. And last of all He appeared to me also, as to one of untimely birth. (1 Corinthians 15:3-8).