The TRUE Authority and the TRUE Glory of the World given to Jesus: Expose of Maestro Erano M Evangelista

Here is another article response to the false prophet known as Maestro Erano M Evangelista and I hope to provide a feasible response and expose him once again.

Jesus' temptation by Satan

Like in the previous article I had responded to, Erano claims that Jesus had given in to the devils demand and submitted to him in the context of Luke 4:2-5. This is what the context ACTUALLY says:

"4 Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, 2 where for forty days he was tempted[a] by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry.

3 The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread.”

4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’[b]”

5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours.”

8 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’[c]”

9 The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down from here. 10 For it is written:

“‘He will command his angels concerning you
    to guard you carefully;
11 they will lift you up in their hands,
    so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’[d]”
12 Jesus answered, “It is said: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’[e]”

13 When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time."

Verse 8 refutes Maestro's claim that Jesus gave into the demands of Satan and demonstrates that he stood firm against Satan and also, Satan was not denying that Jesus was the Son of God at all, he said IF you are the Son of God, do this. Jesus refused because he needn't prove himself to the devil and knew the devil was trying to get him to sin against the Father in heaven. Even when the devil offered Jesus the Kingdoms of the earth, Jesus rebuked Satan and rejected his offer, stating that you are to worship the LORD your God and serve only him. The context demonstrates that true Christians are not submitting to the devil but are submitting to the true God and it is Erano who hasn't the biblical evidence to prove his point.

The Father as mentioned in a previous article said to the disciples to LISTEN TO JESUS and even beforehand Peter confesses Jesus as the Son of God to which Jesus blesses the confession. Even the demons confessed Jesus as the Son of God, but that didn't save them, however it does prove that Satan did acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God:

"Matthew 8:23 Then he got into the boat and his disciples followed him. 24 Suddenly a furious storm came up on the lake, so that the waves swept over the boat. But Jesus was sleeping. 25 The disciples went and woke him, saying, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!”

26 He replied, “You of little faith, why are you so afraid?” Then he got up and rebuked the winds and the waves, and it was completely calm.

27 The men were amazed and asked, “What kind of man is this? Even the winds and the waves obey him!”

28 When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes,[c] two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way. 29 “What do you want with us, Son of God?” they shouted. “Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”

30 Some distance from them a large herd of pigs was feeding. 31 The demons begged Jesus, “If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs.”

The demons obviously knew Jesus true nature and realised they were in big trouble.

Now Jesus wasn't denying that he could command the stones to turn into bread, the Holy Spirit of YHWH, the third person of the Trinity, allowed Jesus to do miracles when he had "taken the form of a slave" as Philippians 2 states. Jesus, though fully God and Man, veiled his glory and set aside his divine perogatives, not his deity and relied on the Holy Spirit to perform miracles among the people. What Erano conveniently fails to mention to his readers, surprise surprise, that both the Holy Spirit and demons, including Satan are capable of doing miracles, thus Jesus did not use Satan's power when doing miracles, since Satan was aware Jesus was able to turn the stones to turn to bread.

For that matter, the Holy Spirit had rested upon Jesus in the shape of a dove, further dealing a death blow to the claims of Erano.

It is allowed in the scriptures to pray in Jesus name, by virtue of him being YHWH God in the flesh. If he wasn't, then Christians should not be praying to him. I have written a number of articles on the Trinity if one wishes to see the evidence:

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/response-to-tovia-singer-on-did-authors.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/classical-trinitarian-objections.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/challenge-from-facebook-unitarian.html

There are others but I think that's it for now.

Fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom
Before carrying on, Erano's baseless claim of Jesus sinning, failing his mission and him violating Deuteronomy 24:16 has already been answered here in this article so we needn't go over those details:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/how-erano-evangelista-deceived-humanity.html
Also the other articles I posted show he is MORE than man but is fully God and Man, not to mention the testimony of the NT refutes Erano's claim that Jesus is not the Son of God.

Here is one of Erano's claims:
"There are pastors and preachers who have heard the teachings from Maestro Evangelista. When asked if any of the teachings that they have learned (from their respective religions), are the same with the true teachings regarding God and Jesus, they replied: “we have spent many years in the study of the scriptures, and now we find out that not even one of the religion’s teachings is true”."
Which religions do they conclude are false? Erano doesn't tell us. Now even though in one of my papers to Yisroel Blumenthal, he and I have said this:

""III. 26. Page 186
Brown talks of a “rapidly growing underground movement of Orthodox and Hasidic Jews” who believe in Jesus. Of-course since this imaginary movement is “underground”, Brown will not be able to supply us with names and addresses. He expects his readers to take his word for it."

Why should he? There are conversions to many faiths that happen without our knowledge and right under our noses."

While I acknowledge there maybe conversions to Erano's religion, it would be nice if he provided some testimonies of his followers. The two I have spoken to couldn't defend their religion without dismissing what I say and ignoring them and repeating their objections.

Now, Erano claims on the basis of Ecclesiastes 12 that studying the Word of God too much has wearied us and he also goes on to say that we need to fear God. It's fine and dandy to fear God, that is at least one thing I can agree on, however, Studying the word doesn't weary or shouldn't weary anyone. Many a great theologian have spent many hours trying to understand the Word of Truth and rightly divide it.

While the generational curses of Deuteronomy do not apply to Christians today, there is no doubt that Christians will be subject to punishment if they refuse to obey YHWH.

There is no doubt that the fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, but to say "As an example: when a man says that he fears God; and we ask him, how many gods are there, he would answer, there is only one God.  When asked again, what is the name of the God whom he fears, he doesn’t know the answer - and could only say, there are many names. This is because he doesn’t truly know Him (God).  A fool’s confession!" is a harsh statement. Just because someone may be ignorant of the name YHWH, that doesn't mean they cannot know YHWH, because the New Covenant promises that "they will all know me from the least of them to the greatest". This is hyper-literalism being presented by Erano, though he doesn't mention Jeremiah 31:31. Also, the New Covenant is made with the Jews, not the church, but the church is grafted into that covenant so that they may know the God of Israel, but the subject of who the covenant was made with is another topic neither here nor there.

The point is, regardless of a Christian addressing the God of Israel as YHWH, HaShem or Adonai or God, it doesn't matter, this doesn't prove Christianity false and Erano's unreasonable criteria flies in his face. My question to him or his followers is, to turn the argument around and use it against them, Do YOU and Erano know the name of God? If not, your argument is USELESS, If so, Why are you chastising people for not using his name in prayer or other God glorifying situations?

I agree that wisdom and understanding is important, but the religions that Erano is condemning have not taken those things away. We need true understanding and wisdom from God and his guidance in these matters and not lean on our own understanding, but I could turn the statement "we don’t have understanding.  The religions have taken it away from us; our innate sense of understanding." and use it against Erano. In fact I could argue that he has taken wisdom and understanding from his followers, since they are so foolish as to blindly accept the claims of Erano without checking into his claims.

As for the misquotation of Psalm 22, that is already covered here:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/how-erano-evangelista-deceived-humanity.html

Christ is not responsible for causing untold suffering and as God he can choose to bring judgement on a nation or spare it and grant it mercy. We suffer because we live in a fallen world, it is not Jesus' fault, it's ours.

The Commandments
Both Erano and I do acknowledge that obedience to God is important. The subject of being saved by grace or by works however, is not covered in this paper and just to clarify, we are saved by Grace and NOT by Works. The subject of works and grace however is another topic which is not going to be discussed in this paper.

Also, His misuse of Luke 12:50-52 has been addressed in the previous article I have written against Erano, as well as what Deuteronomy 4:2 says, which he has quoted in context this time:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/how-erano-evangelista-deceived-humanity.html

An important question that arises among Christians is how much of the Torah applies to us and what parts are we expected to keep? Well I direct you to the following papers:

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/observance-of-torah-demanded-of-gentiles.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/examination-of-some-arguments-raised-by.html

These papers tackle what commandments we are obligated to keep, in light of what Jesus had FULFILLED in the Torah, not abolished, but fulfilled.

A quick note here, Both Erano and I will agree loving your parents is important, but our divergent thinking is what Jesus meant by hating and loving parents. Did Jesus violate this? Let's read the context shall we?
"Luke 14:2525 Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: 26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. 27 And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.

28 “Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Won’t you first sit down and estimate the cost to see if you have enough money to complete it? 29 For if you lay the foundation and are not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule you, 30 saying, ‘This person began to build and wasn’t able to finish.’

31 “Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Won’t he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? 32 If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. 33 In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples."

What Jesus is calling for is undivided absolute loyalty to him which supersedes loyalty to parents. Love and Hate in the Bible in a given context do not mean what we often mean by these terms. To love someone is to care for them and seek their highest good and to hate someone is NOT to care for them and NOT seek their highest good. Jesus is not saying you are to have bitterness and resentment toward your parents, he is saying that you are to care for him more than them, not neglect them. In fact Jesus even chastised the Pharisees for not looking after their parents. It wasn't for that reason alone, but nevertheless that is one of the points Jesus personally highlights

"Mark 7:6 He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

“‘These people honor me with their lips,
    but their hearts are far from me.
7 They worship me in vain;
    their teachings are merely human rules.’[b]
8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe[c] your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’[d] and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[e] 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”"

To say that Jesus told us to hold our parents in utter contempt is indeed a lie that Erano reads into the text.

Eye for an Eye
Now the subject eye for an eye. He appeals to Deuteronomy 19:21 and claims that we must take vengeance on our enemies, rather than pay them back and he quotes "eye for an eye". The text itself is not a licence for settling personal vendettas, but is actually preventing these from happening. He also quotes Matthew 5:39-42 to try and say that Christians are not allowed to pay someone back.

"Matthew 5:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."

There is a difference between personal revenge and allowing justice to occur. Jesus is exhorting his followers not to take vengeance. Also, Jesus isn't saying that you cannot stand up for yourself and rebuke someone for their actions.

James M. Arlandson of Answering Islam has written excellent material on this subject and this is what he says about Matthew 5:38-41. Major points of note he makes I shall underline:

"Here is the verse quoted in the famous Sermon on the Mount. Matt. 5:38-39 says:

38 You have heard that it was said, "Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth." 39 But I tell you, "Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right check, turn to him the other also." (Matt. 5:38-39)

So it appears in the context of the law of retaliation between neighbors or in a small dispute, not a national crisis. There are four parts to the historical (legal) interpretation.

First, Jesus ministered in Israel four decades before the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. And at that time the law of retaliation appears in a legal context, in a courtroom, not in a dispute that was settled by private vendettas. The Mishnah, an early source of commentary on the Torah, was finalized in its written form at the end of the second century or beginning of the third century AD, but the traditions were transmitted orally long before that. Though caution should be observed in using the Mishnah for New Testament studies due to the chronological gap (first to third centuries), the Rabbinic rulings may hint at the ethos or general character of the first century, especially when relative unanimity among the Rabbis prevailed. Jesus could not fail to know this ethos.

The following passage from the Mishnah, seen in the context of bodily injuries, says that all disputes of this kind must be heard in a court:

Assessment [of injury] in money or money’s worth must be made before a court of law . . . . (Baba Kamma 1.3)

At this time in Judaism, bodily injuries could be compensated for with money. Also, Matt. 5:40 confirms a legal context: "if someone wants to sue you." Finally, Matt. 5:25 exhorts Jesus’ disciples to be reconciled with an adversary who is taking them to court, again a legal context.

Second, the word "strike" can mean to hit with the palm of the hand, the assailant doing this deliberately, not in a brawl (A. B. Bruce, The Expositor’s Greek Testament, vol. 1, p. 112). Also, if a hand strikes the right cheek, and the assailant is right-handed, then this means that it is the back of the hand that makes contact, further indicating formality and deepening the insult (D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Matthew, vol. 8, p. 156; Mishnah Baba Kamma 8:6). In addition, the Greek word for "strike" is found in Matt. 26:67, Mark 14:65, John 18:22 and 19:3, all of which speak of a legal context, after the trial of Jesus. This indicates formality and a ritual. So the offended party who follows Jesus should not retaliate when formally opposed or insulted.

Third, the command not to resist "evil" or an "evil or bad one" (person) should be clarified. Evil is an abstraction until it is embodied in people. So in my opinion it is best to see the meaning of the word as an "evil person" in its historical context. The Judaism of Jesus’ time is first concerned with social guidelines, not abstract theology. Matt. 5:25-26 says to settle a dispute peacefully on the way to court, when an opponent has something against the follower of Jesus. But in Matt. 5:38-39, the follower has a grievance against a neighbor. Either way, Jesus is merely saying that it is better either to pursue peace (vv. 25-26) or to let the offense go (vv. 38-39), rather than drag the offender into court and rather than let the opponent drag the Christian into court. Instead of the disciples of Christ taking an adversarial position, he counsels them to see the "evil person" as a future friend and brother outside of a court of law, while they love their enemy and pray for him (vv. 43-48). This is sound advice to his followers who are called to lead in a new and higher way, rather than demand their rights in a court of law.

Fourth, the verse must be interpreted in its literary context, or the verses surrounding the target verse. One commentator paraphrases Christ’s central idea according to the entire context of the key verse in this way: "Though the judge must give redress when demanded, you are not bound to ask it, and if you take My advice you will not" (Bruce, p. 112). In other words, Christ does not deny that anyone has the legal freedom to sue for an offense, because he understood and respected the Torah, which allows for it. For example, 1 Cor. 6:1-8 discusses setting up Christian courts of arbitration. So the Scriptures do not forbid entirely settling disputes in a court of law. Jesus’ main point is the following in a legal context: his disciples should not retaliate, but obey Lev. 19:18 and Matt. 5:42-45, which exhort them not to bear a grudge or seek revenge, but to love their neighbor. He shows us a higher way: forgiveness and reconciliation.

It should be pointed out before leaving this section that some interpreters see Matt. 5:38-39 as legal and also eschatological (Carson, p. 156). Both interpretations may be true at the same time. But it is to this last one that we now turn." (James M. Arlandson, Historical interpretation, Should the State turn the other cheek? http://answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/pacifism5.htm).

This tackles the issue that has been raised by Erano, so again, he is not being fair with the text.

Stay tuned for more refutations of Maestro and see his false ministry crumble to dust more and more.

Answering Judaism.

HOW ERANO EVANGELISTA DECEIVED HUMANITY ABOUT GOD AND JESUS

A fellow on Facebook gave me a link by a self-proclaimed prophet on how mankind (supposedly) was deceived about God. This article intends to expose an article this snake of Satan (Erano) has written, and I hope that this equips you against scum like this man.

Jesus and of course Moses warn us about false prophets who will come to lead us astray. Also, any Tom, Dick and Harry in this modern age can claim to be a prophet like Moses and it is Erano's burden of proof to show he is a prophet like Moses; thus we need to listen to him. But considering he is not even Jewish or even a convert like Elijah, we can safely assume that this man is just a crazy individual.
Now onto the expose.

The first argument he tries to employ is accuse the apostles of proclaiming falsehood. He states that since Paul said if there is no resurrection, then he and other disciples are false witnesses and appeals to Job 14:7-12 and 1 Corinthians 15:13-20 to try and refute the apostles who were proclaiming the resurrection of the dead.

Firstly, Let's read Job 14:7-12
14 “Mortals, born of woman,
    are of few days and full of trouble.
2 They spring up like flowers and wither away;
    like fleeting shadows, they do not endure.
3 Do you fix your eye on them?
    Will you bring them[a] before you for judgment?
4 Who can bring what is pure from the impure?
    No one!
5 A person’s days are determined;
    you have decreed the number of his months
    and have set limits he cannot exceed.
6 So look away from him and let him alone,
    till he has put in his time like a hired laborer.

7 “At least there is hope for a tree:
    If it is cut down, it will sprout again,
    and its new shoots will not fail.
8 Its roots may grow old in the ground
    and its stump die in the soil,
9 yet at the scent of water it will bud
    and put forth shoots like a plant.
10 But a man dies and is laid low;
    he breathes his last and is no more.
11 As the water of a lake dries up
    or a riverbed becomes parched and dry,
12 so he lies down and does not rise;
    till the heavens are no more, people will not awake
    or be roused from their sleep."

Firstly, This appeal to Job is fallacious. In the Old Testament, there isn't a clear understanding of the afterlife. Jesus was the one to reveal life and immortality to light through the gospel. Job is speaking in a context where he was not aware of heaven, hell or an afterlife. Is there a contradiction? no, it’s simply reading out of context and refusing to harmonize the texts of scripture.

Once Jesus came, the apostles were then aware of the resurrection of the dead and the judgement to come as well as eternal life coming through Jesus Christ. Paul's point is not refuted because Job was unaware of a future resurrection. My treatise on exposing this snake of a prophet will continue.

His next objection is Paul said Jesus Christ was the first fruit from among the dead meaning the first to be raise but Matthew said that others rose from the dead beforehand, thus another contradiction. One way this text can be understood is that Jesus is the first to rise from the dead BUT DID NOT DIE, whereas others who rose from the dead died again, which deals with this supposed contradiction.
Erano doesn't realise that those who were resurrected were not given glorified bodies at the time. Jesus however has been risen with a GLORIFIED BODY, which is why his resurrection is singled out as central to the Christian faith.

His next objection is Jesus being crucified on a tree or on a cross. What this guy fails to mention is that the Greek word Xulon has more than one meaning. In fact, in his debate with Osama Abdallah in 2004, Sam Shamoun has responded to this objection quite well and this is the recording of what he said in the debate regarding Xulon. The recording can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp2lwa7JX3U
This pseudo prophet then whines about Galatians 3:13 and Paul's application of Deuteronomy 21:22-23 to Jesus and makes the claim that Jesus was accursed because he transgressed God's commands, led people after other gods to serve them and taught other gods to his people.

Let's deal with this snake's distortions one by one. Jesus took the curse of the Law on himself that he may redeem us for it, but it doesn't mean he sinned at all, The Father poured out his wrath on his Son because Jesus had taken the sins on the world on himself. He became a guilt offering as Isaiah 53 puts it, or an asham that took away our sin. His quotation of Deuteronomy 24:16 doesn't disprove my position. Deuteronomy 24:16 and Ezekiel 18:20 which are the same as one another are not addressing vicarious atonement, it is referring to us being responsible for our own sins. Jesus dying for our sins is not repudiated by the passages in the slightest.

As I have stated in my video response to Eli Cohen, Passages like Jeremiah 19 condemns human sacrifice but nowhere in the TANAKH does it explicitly say or implicitly say that a righteous man cannot willingly lay his life down for others to atone for them, I have often spoke about the death of the righteous found in the Talmud which I have spoken about in other videos. Although Moses offers himself to be blotted out, God refuses to blot him out and says, "I only blot out those who sin against me". Nevertheless, the possibility of vicarious sacrifice is not out of the question.

Also Deuteronomy 4:2 has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with adding an explanation or espousing on the Law or anything close to it, it is speaking about adding or subtracting from the law that has been given. That is all it is referring to.

Additionally, Jesus NEVER called us to serve other gods and worship them. On the contrary, he says that the greatest commandment is there is one God, and you love him with everything and love your neighbour as yourself which can be found in Mark 12:28-29. The God in question is YHWH, not anyone else.

Considering the belief in the Trinity, that makes Jesus YHWH, although he is not the Father in heaven. Jesus would never endorse worship of other gods whether they are ancient or modern so-called deities.

The point about Xulon has already been covered so that need not be done, as with the subject of what firstfruit means. Also, Erano's misuse of Galatians 1:8 does not falsify the Gospel of Matthew. One point he utters is:

"Paul says that Jesus was cursed for us by being hanged on a tree while the present Christian teachings say that Jesus was crucified for our sins."

There is no contradiction here because Jesus became a curse of us and a ransom to pay the price for our sins. It is simply this demented prophets unwillingness to read the scripture as it is meant to be read, IN CONTEXT.

Now of course the so called prophet tries to pit the prophets and apostles against one another and that the highest standard is prophets.
"Did Jesus say that the true authority regarding him were the apostles?
The answer is NO! In fact, he even reiterated that they should consult:
1. The Law of Moses, a prophet; 2. The prophets; and 3. The Psalms of David, also a prophet"

This is not refuting the idea of the apostles being a valid source of authority, all it is simply Jesus telling the apostles that everything in the scriptures pointing to him has been fulfilled. Furthermore, this snake is quoting the Gospels, while at the same time accusing them of false witness. If the Gospels and the Epistles are good enough to prove his case, it's good enough to refute him. Also, If the apostles wrote the Gospels, then Jesus GAVE THEM AUTHORITY TO SPEAK ON MATTERS OF SCRIPTURES!!! The apostles submitted to the writings of the prophets, but this wouldn't negate them being equal to the apostles in terms of inspiration.

Another note, Erano admits that one MUST listen to the prophet like Moses. Of course, his blind followers quote his own website to prove this, but quoting their prophet's website is not going to cut ice with me, I want scripture or reliable commentaries, not the wishful musings of a man who cannot substantiate his claims of prophethood. Even though he claims he had a true prophecy in his testimony, ONE Prophecy, he must have several and if he has made ONE false prophecy, he is a false prophet and we are commanded to avoid him.

While the TANAKH doesn’t document every prophecy that the prophets made, we know that all their prophecies are reliable and accurate, both Jews and Christians will affirm that.

Furthermore the very New Testament he quotes says the prophet like Moses is JESUS CHRIST. And considering that Jesus gave the apostles authority to teach and that the apostles said Jesus was the prophet like Moses, thus by Erano's criteria, I will follow Jesus and the apostles, not Erano. Not to mention the Father in heaven said in Mark 9:7 "Then a cloud appeared and covered them, and a voice came from the cloud: "This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to him!"" Who is God the Father telling us to listen to? Jesus or Erano. It's Jesus he is telling people to follow, not some Gentile who is far removed from when the biblical writings were finished.

He then claims that John 14:15-17 speaks about a man to come and claims that the Holy Spirit is simply the Word of God.

Let's correct these basic errors. The Holy Spirit is NOT the Word of God at all. The Word of God is either the words that God utters, or Jesus Christ himself which John 1:1* speaks of. The Word is distinct from the Spirit and the Holy Spirit is the one who spoke through David. The text explicitly says this
"2 “The Spirit of the Lord spoke through me;
    his word was on my tongue."
It doesn't say that the Lord's word was David's tongue, it says that HIS word was on David's tongue, it doesn't say or imply that the word is the Spirit. Also, it is by the indwelling of the Spirit of the Lord that the prophet like Moses has on his tongue the words of God.

Also, The Holy Spirit is the one who is the Comforter who is sent to the apostles, which is fulfilled in John and the Book of Acts. So, it is a literal spirit or the Comforter is the Holy Spirit, contrary to what this exegetical novice of a prophet claims.

Now Erano claims this in the article, he says:
"Now, this coming prophet like Moses was mostly believed by Christians to be Jesus as taught by the Apostles of Jesus (Acts. 3:22). Now, because of what Jesus said about the coming “Counselor” who has the “Holy Spirit” or Word of God, Jesus was referring to the coming prophet like Moses. This means that the apostles made a false interpretation of the prophecy and never testified about the true Jesus.
How do we identify the real prophet like Moses - what is His sign?
And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him.”
Deuteronomy 18:19 (NKJV)
To identify the true prophet like Moses, he must be the one who speaks in the Name of God and will reveal to us the Name of God!"
Does fulfil the requirements? Yes, in fact the teaching he conveyed to the apostles, It came from the Father and not from his own mouth.

"John 7:16 Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from the one who sent me. 17 Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. 18 Whoever speaks on their own does so to gain personal glory, but he who seeks the glory of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him. 19 Has not Moses given you the law? Yet not one of you keeps the law. Why are you trying to kill me?”"

Thus Jesus was speaking in the Father's name, which he shares with the Father and that is YHWH. The comforter and the prophet like Moses are not the same entity, they are two, and ironically both are members of the Holy Trinity. Additionally, the prophet like Moses is not limited to one individual and it culminates in Christ being the ultimate fulfilment of the prophecy, not some Gentile from a distant land who is centuries removed from the time of Christ. Wow sounds familiar that last bit, it reminds me of a similar idea with the Muslim people. Though Rabbinic Jews and Christians disagree on the subject of Jesus being the prophet like Moses, both will a agree that the prophet like Moses refers to the prophetic office of Israel and that several prophets come after Moses and Christians believe that it culminated in Jesus Christ’s coming.

Of course Erano brings up Moses and the incident with his name not being blotted out which I have already covered. Also another note, Even if Moses request was granted, it wouldn't be enough to satisfy God's wrath, only Christ could do that.

On a side note here, Jesus death on the cross is an IRRELEVANT criteria of being the prophet like Moses, it's just as irrelevant as saying Batman is a prophet like Moses simply because people looked up to him as an model of justice. The objection brought by Erano is moot Jesus death doesn't violate Deuteronomy 18:18 at all.

The next of objection presented is the subject of building the temple itself that it is built by a descendant of David, not a literal son of God, however Jesus being the Son of God doesn't negate him being the Son of David at all, that's a non-argument to be honest. Also, the section about the point about God saying "I'll be his father and he will be my son" refers to the King's coronation, not to ontological sonship.

Within the text of 2 Samuel 7:12-17, it refers to the coronation of the King Solomon. This is royal sonship. Although Jesus was the Son from eternity, the sonship that is spoken of in Hebrews 1:5-8 is sonship in terms of his coronation, which occurred after his resurrection and sat at the Father's righthand. All three events that I have mentioned are to do with the coronation of the Messianic King. David, Solomon, then the Messiah himself. Solomon is God's son in reference to his coronation, which doesn't refute Christians as Erano claims the passage does.

He speaks on the disobedience of the people which won't be covered in this video, I want to specifically tackle the points about Jesus and the apostles. He speaks about the subject of the building of the temple being carried out by another descendent of David and Solomon and comes to the subject of Jesus being mentioned and of course refers to the Immanuel prophecy in Isaiah 7:14, which not only was a sign to Ahaz, but a sign to the Jews that the Messiah had come.

I have written on this subject here of Isaiah 7:14 here: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/taken-out-of-context.html

The first point Erano blathers on about is the Holy Spirit being the word of God which I have already covered and the Holy Spirit speaking through David means the Holy Spirit is speaking HIS word, it doesn't mean the word is the Holy Spirit, the context already refutes this hack of prophet.

Even Unitarians who deny the Trinity and believe the Spirit is the Father's force or presence would NEVER say the Spirit is the Word of God. Also, Psalm 29 in context is not referring back to Genesis, it is referring to a present ongoing reality in the world that YHWH is the eternal God who reigns forever. This is certainly the most desperate, deceptive and worst kind of exegesis I have ever encountered, so much so it makes Osama Abdallah and Nadir Ahmed absolute scholars and that isn't saying much.

Now here we come to genealogies, which is an easy topic to address. I would like to first point out that it is disputed as to whether Mary's genealogy is actually in Luke 3:23, I am inclined to think it's a second line to Joseph, which Eusebius the church historian appears to indicate, as well as New Testament commentator Robert Gundry and others.

I have written on this subject in the following articles:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/rabbinic-dilemma-101.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/an-addendum-to-rabbinic-dilemma-101.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/rabbinic-dilemma-101-revisited.html

Even if it was her family tree, it doesn't have to be explicitly written down, It would be a deduction from the text. A text being written doesn't mean you cannot understand what it's saying. Erano says at one point "The religions interpret this writing of Luke that Mary was from the line of David because according to the religions, ”Heli” is Mary’s father and this is the reason her father Heli became the father of Joseph because he is Heli’s son-in-law so therefore since  Heli comes from the line of David then his daughter Mary comes from the line of David. But that is only what the religions say and we can never read in the scriptures that Heli is Mary’s father - thus since it is not written, then it cannot be accepted as truth.".

If we are limited to what is written in the text and cannot imply something in the text, Erano shoots himself in the foot, because the text of Deuteronomy 18:18 doesn't say explicitly that the prophet like Moses comes from the Philippines or any Gentile nation. It is clear that this snake is engaging in double standards. As James White has often said "Inconsistency is a sign of a failed argument".

Also, as stated before, I don't hold to the view that Mary's genealogy is in Luke 3:23, I believe it is another line that's connected to Joseph. I have written on this in the articles posted above under the banner of Rabbinic Dilemma 101.

Another point he brings up is the following:
"However since Joseph is from the line of David then we can logically conclude that Jesus is truly not a direct and genetic son of God but only a descendant of David."

At least this man unlike Rabbinic Jews admits Jesus inherited the throne from Joseph; that at least I can commend. However, Christians DO NOT say Jesus is a "genetic" son of God. We believe he is the Son of God from eternity past. Jesus being a Son of David doesn't negate him being the Son of God, that's a false dilemma. Also, again the Holy Spirit is not the Word. The Holy Spirit is distinct from the Word.

Even IF Mary's genealogy is never mentioned, if the same angel is good enough to help this false prophet, it's good enough to bury him. Why? Because even if Mary is not from the tribe of David, which is disputed, she still bares the child as from the HOUSE OF DAVID!! Erano even admits that Jesus is the Son of David through Joseph's line. This man is contradicting himself all over the place. You want the evidence that Mary bore the child of David regardless of her genealogy appearing, where it is in the VERY GOSPELS ERANO QUOTES:

"Luke 1:26 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, 27 to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary. 28 The angel went to her and said, “Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”
29 Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be. 30 But the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; you have found favor with God. 31 You will conceive and give birth to a son, and you are to call him Jesus. 32 He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, 33 and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.”
34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”
35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[b] the Son of God. 36 Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month. 37 For no word from God will ever fail.”"

Do you see that this man is quoting scripture like a Burger King meal, I’ll take this text, but I won't take this text. Again, NOT EVERY CHRISTIAN says Luke 3 has Mary's genealogy, some do, some do not, and I take the position it isn't.

Also, the Holy Spirit allowing Mary to conceive is not described as "God impregnating her". We do not believe the Holy Spirit had sex with Mary, that's vile blasphemy. Then again, this so-called prophet wouldn't care considering he has already been given to a reprobate mind.

Also, God is not unrighteous for allowing the virgin to conceive at all, so to apply Deuteronomy 22:24 or misapplying it wouldn't work. To point of fact what this deceiver fails to mention is only the Romans at that time could enact a death penalty.

"In the law of God for the people of Israel, if a man sleeps with a woman who was pledged to be married or betrothed (to another man) and they are found out – they will both be stoned to death most especially the man because he violated other man’s wife - this punishment should be done immediately in order to PURGE the evil from among them.
NOW religions teach us that God impregnated Mary and even twist the scriptures to make it appear that Mary is also from the line of David to show us that Jesus is a Son of God but what they did is blasphemy and an insult to the righteousness of God. Why?
Because with their false doctrine of God impregnating a woman named Mary who was already PLEDGED to be married with Joseph they made it appear that God broke his own law and therefore committed an EVIL deed. This makes the Almighty God of the prophets an unrighteous God!
It only means that what the religions have taught all this time regarding the birth of Jesus – about God (the Holy Spirit) impregnating Mary is false, untrue, and a great blasphemy to God.
It also shows that the god that the religions preach is not the God of Moses (who is a righteous God) but a god of evil; a god who they claim impregnated a woman who was pledged to be married!
This is why evil exists today in the world because we followed the teachings of those who were not sent by the God of Moses.  They are the false prophets who use the Bible to teach a different god, a god we have not known!"

I have already covered the lie that Jesus or any person connected in the New Testament taught that the God Christians worship is a different God from the God of Abraham. Considering the angel was in the Land of Israel and the only God in the land was YHWH, Mary could only be talking to an angel sent by YHWH himself. Also, wouldn't YHWH be able protect Mary and Joseph from destruction by revealing the truth of the virgin birth to someone? Who is to say YHWH couldn't do that? It is clear that this nefarious deceiver is guilty of the vilest satanic blasphemies, not us Christians.

What makes this man even more nefarious, is his false accusation of Jesus being put to death for his own sins, Let's continue to expose this servant of Satan.

When Jesus was crucified and flogged, he was not guilty of sin, rather he was accused falsely of sin. Jesus did not receive the punishment that was due in 2 Samuel 7:14-16 at all. In fact, the very NT which Erano quotes says he was SINLESS. Even Jesus testifies of this fact. Not even his butchery of Psalm 89 proves that Jesus ever sinned. Just because Psalm 89:28 applies to Jesus, which doesn't mean the apostles were claiming or the Bible is claiming Jesus sinned. Jesus does not fall under the condemnation of 2 Samuel 7:14-16. Jesus himself ALSO SAID he came to GIVE HIS LIFE AS A RANSOM FOR MANY I.E, DIE FOR OUR SINS!!!!

If the word wills, I may respond to some other articles this man has written, but in the meantime, I think this article may be one among many to expose this imposter and apostate.

Jesus was testifying the truth that he is the Son of God. Erano fails to mention that the FATHER IN HEAVEN says Jesus was and is his Son, especially at his baptism and of course he exhorted the disciples to LISTEN to Jesus, not disregard him.

His false claim about Jesus getting his miracles from Satan I may address in the future if the Lord Wills.
Of course the man then arrogantly says:

"Of course, many Christian believers, pastors and theologians will not agree with what is revealed by Maestro Evangelista.  Who are these people to stand against what the prophet like Moses, Maestro Evangelista, reveals about Jesus?  What they know about Jesus came from the lies made by the apostles and not from God. God Himself, (the God who sent Jesus) is the One who had commanded the prophet like Moses (Maestro Evangelista) to reveal the truth about Jesus!
It is therefore futile for any theologian or pastor to stand against what the prophet like Moses speaks about God and about Jesus.  What the prophet like Moses reveals about the Name of God and the real Jesus thru the scriptures came not from his own research (like the said theologians and pastors) BUT FROM GOD.  It is God Himself who revealed it to him and guides him in how to explain it thru the scriptures."

This guy cannot prove he is a prophet like Moses, ONE prophecy in his testimony doesn't prove he is that prophet, it has to be MULTIPLE prophecies as stated before. I have asked his followers to prove he is a prophet from scripture though they kept running to his website which is circular reasoning anyway, because they assume the man is telling the truth.

He then rejects the interpretation that Isaiah 53 is a Messianic prophecy. I will not dispute that it is also talking about Israel, but that doesn't mean it is NOT talking about the Messiah at all. In his debate with Osama Abdallah on Muhammad being in the Bible, Anthony Rogers made a good point about some of the Servant Passages like Isaiah 42 that Israel does double duty. He says this in his first rebuttal period roughly about 54-55 minutes into the video. In Isaiah 53, it can speak of Israel, but can also speak of the Messiah, who I am convinced is Jesus and the NT writers were convinced that Jesus was the ultimate fulfilment of the passage.

I have also made the following point in my response to Yisroel Blumenthal, the author of Contra Brown:
"The NT application of Isaiah 49 wouldn't refute the Messianic application given by Christians. On the contrary, Rabbinic Jews today claim that the Messiah and Israel are found collectively in Isaiah 53, So the same thing would be the case in Isaiah 49. The Messiah is made a light to the nations and so will also those who put their trust in the Messiah. Not to mention the Messiah in Isaiah 53 suffers on behalf of the rightous remnant, as well as the nations who put their trust in him."

Erano makes two points here, he says:
"1. BECAUSE GOD HAS A LAW in Deuteronomy 24:16 that each man is to die for his own sin and to say that God allowed a sinless man to die for the sins of others is to say that God broke His own law.
2. ONLY A TRUE PROPHET CAN EXPLAIN THE WRITING OF ANOTHER PROPHET OF GOD."

Deuteronomy 24:16 I have already covered so I needn't go over that again and the second point doesn't prove that Erano is a true prophet. That burden of proof is on him.

Isaiah 53 is another point that he raises which has already been addressed on my YouTube account. It has also been addressed in the following article here:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/refuting-erano-false-prophet-on-isaiah.html

His next gripe is the supposed misquotation by the apostles on Hosea 11:1. In the original context, it is speaking of Israel, but in the Messianic light, it is speaking of Christ. The apostle was simply showing the Messiah's calling was like how Israel was called. He is introducing a parallel. Some have argued that the New Testament utilizes a Jewish hermeneutic called Midrash, which looks not only at the literal meaning of a text, but the possible interpretations, such as Pardes or Peshat, Drash, Remez and Sod. However this is a debatable point, but the point is, Matthew is connecting a parallel between Israel's calling and the Messiah's. Just as Israel was called out, so was the Messiah called out. That's simply the point Matthew is making.
I have written on this point here: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/taken-out-of-context.html

Now regarding 2 Samuel 7:14. It is often misused to say that Jesus is a sinner. I would argue however that when he commits iniquity statement is a WHAT IF scenario rather than a will be scenario, so there isn't a problem here at all. Some translations even say, "IF HE COMMITS INIQUITY". Furthermore, the author of Hebrews has more than one passage in mind regarding this section, which are Psalm 2:7 and 1 Chronicles 17:13. One explanation offered by the Gills exposition of the entire Bible is this:
"I will be his father, and he shall be my son,.... That is, I will be as kind unto him, and careful of him, as a father of a son; or he shall be, and appear to be my son, by adopting grace, as no doubt Solomon was, notwithstanding all his failings. This is applied to Christ, the antitypical Solomon, who was, in an higher sense, the Son of God, even by natural and eternal generation; see Hebrews 1:5,
if he commit iniquity; which cannot be supposed of Christ; for though he was made sin by imputation, he neither knew nor did any, but may be supposed of his spiritual offspring, whom he represented as an head and surety, as of Solomon, who committed many sins and transgressions:".

That deals with the first argument that people often raise regarding this.

The apostles are then accused of profiteering in the context of the Bible. They were not doing this. The reason they were dealing with the money was for the sake of the Gospel, but they were not conning people out of their wages. The money was being used to advance the Gospel, that's the whole reason for it anyway. As for Jesus crying out "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?", That is a quotation from Psalm 22 about the vindication of God's servant David. It is recognized also as Messianic in Nature by Christians because of Jesus' application of it to himself. Furthermore, when he said it, The judgement he bore for our sake was over. There was no complaining at all.

Jesus never used money as a means of gain, The misquotation of Mark 10:17-18 is not saying Jesus was making money of people, He was showing the rich man that his money was his idol. Christ's point was that you must be willing to forsake all to follow him. He is not saying that all sell their possessions, he is demanding people to love him and the Father more than everything in this world. Jesus was not sinning whatsoever when telling the rich man to sell his riches, he was pointing out the man was an idolater and had not kept the commandments perfectly.

Riches in and of themselves are not evil, it's loving them more than God which is evil. The OT and the NT show the advantages and disadvantages of being rich. You can be blessed by God with riches to finance his kingdom. The money used by the apostles to advance the Gospel of the kingdom. Also, why is it that this man, like the Rabbinic community assume that the Messiah HAS to build the temple?

The subject of the Messiah building the temple I would need to think over.

Erano then tries to say that Christians are supposed to tithe. Incorrect, there is no command in the New Testament to tithe under the New Covenant. Tithing is an Old Covenant law and is not reiterated in the NT. Instead we are to give out of gratitude, Which Paul mentions in 2 Corinthians 9:7
"7 Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver."

There is nothing about stealing from the poor in this context whatsoever.

Regarding the subject of the woman who gave her only coin, all Jesus did was illustrate the point that the woman was more righteous than all the rich men with their gifts because they only gave a small portion of what they had, but the woman gave everything she had and thus loved God more than them. The subject of helping the widows was IRRELEVANT to his point to begin with. No sin committed there. Not to mention he sends the disciples out who appoint elders to take care OF WIDOWS, IN THE VERY NT ERANO QUOTES!!!! This shows how disingenuous he is.

There are many works out their dealing with the subject of the contradictions in the accounts of the tomb which address this topic. One example can be found here on the blog of biblegateway: http://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2011/06/examining-a-bible-contradiction-who-discovered-the-empty-tomb/

It's funny how Erano claims the disciples stole the body of Jesus, that's ridiculous. Jesus was DEAD, and rose from the Dead, Mary was clearly in shocked when the one she found out that the gardener was Jesus, she was pleased to see her Rabbi and Teacher was alive. Jesus was not giving an alibi in fear of exposure, the reason he told Mary not to hold on to him was because she was to tell the apostles he was alive and that he was returning to the Father.

The fact Jesus was DEAD, is evident from the very New Testament that Erano butchers and distorts to his own destruction. Read The Gospels in context, what do they all affirm in the biblical texts, they ALL say without exception that he breathed his last, this can be found in Matthew 27:27-56, Mark 15:21-38, Luke 23:26-49, and John 19:16-37. It is evident that this man has no clue what he is on about.

As for the world Xulon, that has already been covered.

As for his abuse of Matthew 28:11-15, Erano says:
"With all the inconsistencies that the gospels speak about Jesus’ resurrection, how can we believe that the apostles were truthful about what they say that Jesus rose up from the dead and that they did not steal Jesus’ body?"

A simple response, the stealing of the bodies is a CLAIM OF THE GUARDS, Furthermore, if the disciples had stolen the body and the guards had been telling the truth, they would not be so willing to die for what they believed. They would never have gone through with their deaths had they wilfully knew that they had stolen the body. No person will die for something they know to be a lie.

This I cover in another set of responses to Yisroel Blumenthal:

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/examination-of-some-arguments-raised-by_25.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/examination-of-some-arguments-raised-by_26.html

Once again he objects to the subject of the Psalm 22 applying to Jesus and brings up the Xulon argument which is addressed in the video I have posted in this article. As for the misapplication of Psalm 38, it is not referring to Yeshua at all, it is referring to David begging YHWH for deliverance from sin and his enemies. There is no connection to Jesus. His disciples did abandon him but not because of Christ sinning, but because they didn't want to get caught themselves.

The subject of who rose first has already been covered, but this time Erano tries to create a contradiction between Matthew 27 regarding the people who rose from the dead and 1 Thessalonians 4 where it speaks of the coming of Christ and what will transpire.

The incident in Matthew regarding raising the saints to life was not a final resurrection at the end of days, whereas 1 Thessalonians is speaking of the resurrection of the dead and the rapture of believers, it is a completely different context and it simply means in 1 Thessalonians that the dead are the first to be resurrected and caught up to meet the Lord with those  believers who are still alive following. There is NO CONTRADICTION whatsoever and the whole reason for giving money to the apostles was to fund their ministry to spread the Gospel to the nations. 1 Thessalonians was not some false hope Paul was not being presented as a malicious wolf in sheep’s clothing, he is comforting or strengthening their faith as it should actually say.
As for the texts in John 19:28-30, Luke 23:44-49, Mark 15:37-39, There is a simple explanation.

"Luke 23:44-49
44 It was now about noon, and darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon, 45 for the sun stopped shining. And the curtain of the temple was torn in two. 46 Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.”[a] When he had said this, he breathed his last.

47 The centurion, seeing what had happened, praised God and said, “Surely this was a righteous man.” 48 When all the people who had gathered to witness this sight saw what took place, they beat their breasts and went away. 49 But all those who knew him, including the women who had followed him from Galilee, stood at a distance, watching these things."

"Mark 15:37-39
37 With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last.

38 The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. 39 And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, saw how he died,[a] he said, “Surely this man was the Son of God!”"

"John 19:28-30
28 Later, knowing that everything had now been finished, and so that Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” 29 A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. 30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit."

The passages in question do not mention every detail that is supposed to happen within their context. This objection is answered by 101 Cleared up Contradictions:
"The question being forwarded is what the centurion at the cross said when Yahshua died. The two passages quoted are Mark 15:39 and Luke 23:47. However as has been said before with other apparent contradictions these passages are not contradictory but complementary. Matthew 27:54 and Mark 15:39 agree that the centurion exclaimed that Yahshua, "was the Son of God!" Luke 23:47 however mentions that the centurion also refers to Yahshua as, "a righteous man." Is it so hard to understand that the centurion said both? "

He brings up Job again to try and refute the resurrection but that has already been addressed in this paper. What he says however is this:

" As it is written – “So man lies down and does not rise, Till the heavens are no more, they will not awake. Nor be roused from their sleep.”- This portends that the dead will not rise again because for such thing to happen, the heavens have to be gone first. "

Again, In the Old Testament, there isn't a clear understanding of the afterlife. It's not until the book of Daniel we have a hint of the resurrection in chapter 12, regarding those who raise to everlasting life, or everlasting condemnation.

He appeals to Ezekiel to try and refute the resurrection simply because Job was righteous.

"12 The word of the Lord came to me: 13 “Son of man, if a country sins against me by being unfaithful and I stretch out my hand against it to cut off its food supply and send famine upon it and kill its people and their animals, 14 even if these three men—Noah, Daniel[a] and Job—were in it, they could save only themselves by their righteousness, declares the Sovereign Lord."

Job was righteous but that doesn't mean he would know everything that would transpire.

Also in Ecclesiastes 3, Solomon was focused on his present life and not on eternal life, not to mention he was not aware of the resurrection of the dead or anything like that for the same reason Job didn't know. Even Rabbinic Jews today, despite their denial of Christ, hold to a resurrection of the dead and believe the Messiah will come and usher in universal harmony. It is clear that the passage in Ecclesiastes would not refute Jews or Christians on the existence of an afterlife, considering Solomon was writing in a time where the resurrection was unknown to them.

The next point raised by Erano is this:

" Why did God give the earth to mankind?
For thus says the Lord,   Who created the heavens,
Who is God, Who formed the earth and made it,
Who has established it, Who did not create it in vain,
Who formed it to be inhabited: “I am the Lord, and there is no other.

Isaiah 45:18 NKJV
As it is written God created the Earth to be inhabited.  God presages the earth to be created for us to live in and NOT THE HEAVENS. We are intended for this world and this world alone.

We have to live our lives to the fullest and make the world a better place for us and for the next generations to enjoy! 
The deception of the apostles about a coming life in heaven is what made man give little importance to his life on earth. The hope for a second life in heaven as promised by the religions is a hoax. However, it is also the fault of man that he allowed himself to be deceived by the religions into believing in an afterlife in heaven. A believer would give up his life on earth because he was hoping for a better life in heaven."

What this ignoramus fails to mention is that in Christianity, those who die in Christ go to heaven and after the final judgment, we will live on the new earth with Christ, there will be a new heaven and earth. Those who die in Christ do go to heaven and live there for a while. It doesn't say man won't live in heaven period, the OT saints ARE in heaven with the Lord.

Jesus is not some false renegade deity that the disciples promoted, he is according to the scriptures, specifically the NT, YHWH in human flesh but he is not the Father in heaven. Thus, the curses in Deuteronomy 11 or 28 did not fall on Christians at all. Jesus IS YHWH and Christians by calling on Christ's name, call on the name of YHWH, thus, no violation of the scripture. You cannot extend these curses of the Old Testament to the entire planet; they are specific to the Children of Israel and the Mosaic Law. Disease and sin have always been around since the time of Adam's disobedience.

God can bring judgment on the church because of disobedience, but not necessarily in the sense that you had plagues in the OT. The point is, the disciples are not responsible for a false God being worshipped, nor have their brought disaster on this planet at all. Jesus actually warned about the increase of wars, diseases and other things in the end times, so Erano is simply in error at this point.

Next Erano quotes from Genesis 1:25-27 and of course butchers the text once again. One point he brings up is this:

"Question: In what form are we in the likeness or image of God? 

As for me, I will see Your face in righteousness;

I shall be satisfied when I awake in Your likeness.

Psalm 17:15 NKJV
It is in righteousness that we resemble God, not in appearance or physical form."

Not that any Christian claims that that being made in God's image means that God has a human body. It's ridiculous. Furthermore, Though Christians do teach that Jesus is YHWH who took on human flesh, we do not believe he existed as man from the beginning, it's only from the incarnation onwards that Jesus has a physical body, mainly because it had not taken place in the time of Genesis.

As for what food we eat, He claims that fruits and seeds based of Genesis 1:29 are the only things humans may consume. However, what he fails to mention is that in Genesis 9 after the flood which had taken place long after the fall is that the very God on Genesis 1 ALLOWS MAN TO EAT MEAT, I.E ANIMALS!!! That is in the VERY SAME BOOK HE QUOTED!!!

Don't believe me? Read Genesis 9:1-7
"Genesis 9 (New International Version)
9 Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. 2 The fear and dread of you will fall on all the beasts of the earth, and on all the birds in the sky, on every creature that moves along the ground, and on all the fish in the sea; they are given into your hands. 3 Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

4 “But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. 5 And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being.

6 “Whoever sheds human blood,
    by humans shall their blood be shed;
for in the image of God
    has God made mankind.

7 As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it.”"

If you read Leviticus 11, Even though that chapter forbids certain meats, but nevertheless, what is eaten at Passover? LAMB!!! THAT'S MEAT FOLKS!!!

In the NT, we are not under kosher, but regardless, even a kosher diet is not a vegetarian one. God allows mankind to eat animal meat, he is not going to condemn us to hell for eating meat. It was not a test from God. Also, the warning in the passage is not warning us of the consequence of eating animals, it is a prohibition against consuming its blood and killing mankind and the eating of meat is not responsible for depleting our years in Genesis. It was actually GOD who decreased how long man lived for in Genesis 6:3, which occurred before the allowance of meat.

Verses 4-5 is not saying we cannot eat meat and we ignored what God said, it actually says that we cannot consume blood.

While Erano doesn’t believe in hell, nor is he claiming that God will send us to hell, he is still expressing a disapproval of Christians eating meat and claiming our lives are shortened, when point of fact man’s days were already shortened before the flood.

He claims that Peter deceived Jesus in Matthew 16:18-23. Let's actually read it.

"21 From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.

22 Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!”

23 Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”"

Jesus is not being deceived by Satan, He is rebuking Peter for trying to halt his mission of dying for our sins. Peter tried to talk Jesus out of what he was doing because Peter did not understand that was what Jesus needed to do.

Also in his misquotation of Luke 4:5, Erano tries to say that Jesus is being misled by Satan. Here's the problem, read the context:
"5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours.”

8 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’[c]”"

Jesus actually repudiates the worship of Satan and other Gods after Satan tries to offer him the Kingdom of this world. Jesus REJECTS Satan's offer, IN VERSE 8!!!

As for the name of God, It's YHWH. That's the God Christians worship. Jesus did his miracles in the NAME OF YHWH. We do know what God's name is, thus you cannot claim we don't know the name of God.

Although the Name YHWH doesn't appear in the NT, it is obvious from the context of the NT as a whole that Jesus told us to follow YHWH, and that again would entail worshipping Jesus, since he is YHWH, though he is not the Father. Read Mark 12:29, what does it say?

""The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one."

Who is the Lord in this context? Go back to the OT, it is YHWH. Case closed, Erano has been exposed. The Kingdom that Christians promise to the world is the KINGDOM OF GOD.

Regarding Revelation 2:1-3, Erano claims that the apostles are condemned to hell and were false witnesses. The snake fails to mention that it is Jesus is speaking in the context and he is speaking of those who CLAIM TO BE APOSTLES, not the 12 apostles. Furthermore, the same context Jesus claims to be the Alpha and Omega, a title of YHWH. The way to reconcile this is the Doctrine of the Trinity. If you don't believe me about Revelation 2, check this article out which addresses the issue: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/the-trinity-is-not-truth.html

As for Revelation 12:9, it is speaking of the devil and the evil angels who sided with him. In fact just reading on from Revelation 12-14, you will find the saints are the ones who are oppressed by the devil and the beast.

As for 2 Samuel 7:14, that is already covered.

Now regarding the following comment by Erano:
"Read the Old Testament books of the Bible, wherein the story of the men of God were written, including their faults: Moses’ disobedience, David’s sin, Solomon’s false worship- they were all recorded. 

The apostles should have written in the same balanced manner about Jesus. 

The apostles should have emphasized in their epistles regarding the coming Helper (that Jesus spoke about) who will be sent by God to testify about him (Jesus).  They should not have given their interpretations of the prophecies that God spoke thru His prophets, since they had no authority from God."

The apostles were balanced in what they said. In fact, Jesus even asked the Pharisees "Which of you can accuse me of sin?". The NT Testament does affirm the sinlessness of Jesus Christ. If Jesus was a sinner, then his atonement would not be able to satisfy the wrath of God at all.

Erano raised this point as well:
"Maestro Eraño Evangelista says: If Jesus had successfully fulfilled his mission written in the prophecies; there would be no need for the book of Revelation. 

With Jesus failing to complete his mission, (for he was deceived by Satan; followed Satan and taught its teachings), the book of Revelation had to be written so that the deception of Jesus and his apostles may be brought to light or exposed! 

The apostles and disciples have died long ago and they can no longer be punished for the deception and their fraudulent teachings.  The ones who should now be punished are the religious leaders as they now represent the teachings of the apostles. 

You might ask- If the apostles are liars then who wrote the book of Revelation? 

Is he an apostle? 

Maestro Evangelista reveals to us the true identity of the writer of the Book of Revelation: 

Now I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things. Then he said to me, “See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.”

Revelation 22:8-9 NKJV 

“your brethren the prophets”- The religions assumed that the author of the book was the man they call "John, the Divine", an apostle.  However, the book of Revelation was written by John of Patmos, who was also a prophet of God. 

It cannot be denied now that the apostles are liars."

It is debatable who wrote the book, but you can make a strong case that the John who is writing is John the Apostle, but this is another story. Revelation was not written to expose Jesus. The same book says Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, it is not suggesting that the apostles were wicked reprobate men, that subject has already been covered.

Now, Erano claims that Isaiah 14:9-10 is speaking of the disciples and that people will know the truth from the prophet like Moses. It is not, it is actually speaking of Babylon being judged by God and it is NOT referring to the church at all:
"Isaiah 14 The Lord will have compassion on Jacob;
    once again he will choose Israel
    and will settle them in their own land.
Foreigners will join them
    and unite with the descendants of Jacob.
2 Nations will take them
    and bring them to their own place.
And Israel will take possession of the nations
    and make them male and female servants in the Lord’s land.
They will make captives of their captors
    and rule over their oppressors.

3 On the day the Lord gives you relief from your suffering and turmoil and from the harsh labor forced on you, 4 you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:

How the oppressor has come to an end!
    How his fury[a] has ended!
5 The Lord has broken the rod of the wicked,
    the scepter of the rulers,
6 which in anger struck down peoples
    with unceasing blows,
and in fury subdued nations
    with relentless aggression.
7 All the lands are at rest and at peace;
    they break into singing.
8 Even the junipers and the cedars of Lebanon
    gloat over you and say,
“Now that you have been laid low,
    no one comes to cut us down.”

9 The realm of the dead below is all astir
    to meet you at your coming;
it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you—
    all those who were leaders in the world;
it makes them rise from their thrones—
    all those who were kings over the nations.
10 They will all respond,
    they will say to you,
“You also have become weak, as we are;
    you have become like us.”
11 All your pomp has been brought down to the grave,
    along with the noise of your harps;
maggots are spread out beneath you
    and worms cover you.

12 How you have fallen from heaven,
    morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
    you who once laid low the nations!
13 You said in your heart,
    “I will ascend to the heavens;
I will raise my throne
    above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
    on the utmost heights of Mount Zaphon.[b]
14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
    I will make myself like the Most High.”
15 But you are brought down to the realm of the dead,
    to the depths of the pit.

16 Those who see you stare at you,
    they ponder your fate:
“Is this the man who shook the earth
    and made kingdoms tremble,
17 the man who made the world a wilderness,
    who overthrew its cities
    and would not let his captives go home?”

18 All the kings of the nations lie in state,
    each in his own tomb.
19 But you are cast out of your tomb
    like a rejected branch;
you are covered with the slain,
    with those pierced by the sword,
    those who descend to the stones of the pit.
Like a corpse trampled underfoot,
20     you will not join them in burial,
for you have destroyed your land
    and killed your people.

Let the offspring of the wicked
    never be mentioned again.
21 Prepare a place to slaughter his children
    for the sins of their ancestors;
they are not to rise to inherit the land
    and cover the earth with their cities.

22 “I will rise up against them,”
    declares the Lord Almighty.
“I will wipe out Babylon’s name and survivors,
    her offspring and descendants,”
declares the Lord.
23 “I will turn her into a place for owls
    and into swampland;
I will sweep her with the broom of destruction,”
    declares the Lord Almighty."

Isaiah 14 is also a reference to Satan symbolically, since Jesus in Luke 12 said that he saw Satan fall from heaven like lightning and even second Enoch also makes the claim that this is about Satan.

Also, If Erano wants to whine about Jesus rising from the dead or not, tough, the same book he quotes demonstrates that Jesus rose from the dead.

As for the term Lucifer, I recommend looking at this video by James White on the subject of the KJV in this video called "King James Onlyists Burn the NIV in Ignorance", this deals with the point about Lucifer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5T2aqbyxuA

As for Psalm 110, there is no connection to Isaiah 14 at all. In the initial context, David is the one identified as the Lord YHWH is addressing. In a Messianic Context, the main focus of the Psalm is David identifying the Messiah as his Lord. The Father is speaking to the Son and telling him to sit at his right hand. No connection is made by the NT writers that Jesus is Lucifer in Isaiah 14, in fact Jesus himself states that SATAN, is the one who was thrown out of heaven as stated before.

In Luke 12:49-53 We read the following:
"49 “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed! 51 Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. 52 From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. 53 They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”"

Erano tries to say the following:
"The religions continue to say that Jesus brought “peace” even when Jesus himself said that he brought “division”! If Jesus really did bring “peace” to this world, we should already have everlasting peace today. Since Jesus said he brought division, the world continues to experience the division in terms of conflict, instability, economic woes, and suffering."

In the actual context of Luke 12:49-53, Jesus is speaking about a metaphorical sword of division within families that will occur if someone chooses to follow him. He says the same thing in Matthew 10:34 but expands on it and is saying in essence if you don't love me more than your family, don't follow me because by doing so you will have opposition.

Here is what he says:
"34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn

“‘a man against his father,
    a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36     a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’[c]

37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it."

It is claimed by Erano that Jesus did the following:
" “Who made the world as a wilderness” -Jesus taught the teachings of Satan by overturning the laws of God (Matthew.22:34-40). The people were deceived to worship a different god, Satan. Because of what Jesus had done, people lived under the curse of God and without God’s blessing."

Let's read the text itself:
"34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[c] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”".

Jesus didn't overturn the Law, he fulfilled it. He is simply being asked what is the greatest commandments, but what is Jesus referring to? THE TORAH!!! The very passage refutes the claim of Erano yet again.

Once again he claims Jesus sinned and quotes 2 Samuel 7:14 again which I have already refuted him on that. Another point I will address Luke 24:20-21 where Erano claims Jesus had actually failed in his mission. However, he did not quote the context and we can see why:
"19 “What things?” he asked.

“About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. 20 The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. 22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning 23 but didn’t find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. 24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but they did not see Jesus.”

25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself."

Rather than fail, Jesus actually managed to carry out his mission, the men didn't understand what the scriptures had been saying. In fact, Jesus is speaking to the men, go back to verse 14 and you'll see Jesus ROSE FROM THE DEAD AS THE SCRIPTURES SAID!!! The men didn't understand and once again Erano once again shoots himself in the foot. Also, Luke 24:44-48 says the following:

"44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. 46 He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. 49 I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”"

Quite contrary to what was said by Erano, Jesus was actually successful, he did not fail.

" After the death of Jesus,  the people of Israel were subjected to more persecutions, killed, and dispersed to various parts of the world instead of being established as a powerful kingdom as in the times of King David and King Solomon. 

Instead of saving his people Israel, the more he made them suffer, oppressed, and let them fall into the hands of Satan since, he (Jesus) worshiped Satan."

Jesus will restore all things in his second coming and he spoke of wars and other things bad increasing before he returns. However, this doesn't justify the persecution of the Jews, and Jesus will judge the Christians who did this to them because they did not carry out his teaching. True Christians WILL NOT KILL JEWS OUT OF ANTI-SEMITIC HATRED!!!

As for Jesus supposedly being the Bright Morning Star in the sense Satan is. This video by James White refutes that lie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5T2aqbyxuA

And this statement here by Erano proves how much of a snake he really is.
"He (Erano) never did any research.  His revelations through the scriptures are the fulfillment of what God told Moses a long time ago: that a prophet “like him” (like Moses) would come and it was this prophet who was given by God the task to reveal and explain the Word of God and the Holy Bible."

Not a chance in hell did this guy come as the prophet like Moses. He then goes on to misquote Luke 18:31-34 when it comes to what he came to do. Just because the apostles didn't understand Jesus at a certain point, doesn't they didn't understand later on, as they did understand AFTER the resurrection of Jesus in Luke 24. Also, the very text Erano quotes refutes him on the idea that Jesus stole the body.... again.

His points on Ecclesiastes 3 and Job 14 were raised more than once so I needn't address this again, because it has been refuted.

He then says this:

" Again, the prophet like Moses, Maestro Evangelista will explain the "three days" or "the third day" Jesus talked about; saying, we should only use our wisdom and understanding.
What Jesus meant was that it is not literally "three days," but… 

For a thousand years in Your sight
Are like yesterday when it is past,
And like a watch in the night.

Psalm 90:4 NKJV 

And in another version:

For a thousand years in your sight
are like a day that has just gone by,
or like a watch in the night.
Psalm 90:4 (NIV) 

A thousand years to man is a day to God, is it true? 

But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day 

is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

2 Peter 3:8 (NKJV) 

Jesus was actually saying that the "third day" will be on the third millennia or after 2000 years, which is our present time. The “Son of Man” that Jesus was referring to is the man who will come in his name, the “angel” in Revelation 22:16, the Counselor /Helper in John 14:26 who is the prophet like Moses in Deuteronomy 18:18-19!"

The text in 2 Peter doesn't speak of Jesus three days in the underworld, he is speaking about the Lord's return, He is saying that the Lord isn't slow in keeping his promises at all and is holding off Judgment day long enough for people to repent. Obviously not everyone will repent, but God is giving time.

"8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare.[a]

11 Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives 12 as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming.[b] That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. 13 But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells."

Also, the three days that Jesus speaks of are not literal 24-hour periods. Jews don't count in 24-hour periods at all. I have a response to Shadid Lewis on the Three Days and Three Nights that speak in this issue: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf4qqIvuGAA*). Erano once again then brings up the subject of John 14:26 which has been covered already.

Hosea 6 is then quoted and abused once again. He does another article on Ephraim and Judah which I won't get into this article now. It's referring to the two nations of Israel and God knows what Erano has done to butcher those texts.

Hosea 6 does refer to the healing of the people of Israel if there is genuine repentance on their part. Some such as Matthew Henry have mentioned a foreshadowing of Jesus within this text: http://biblehub.com/hosea/6-2.htm The commentary can be found here.

Hosea 6 doesn't anathematize the apostles at all, it refers to the restoration of Israel when they repent of their wicked ways. YHWH is not condemning Christians to hell in the text as Erano falsely claims. Also, the text in verse 6, it is not a denial of sacrifices period at all, it doesn't suggest that God is against sacrifices in and of themselves nor a denial of them. In fact Samuel said to obey God's voice is better than many sacrifices but this is not a denial of sacrifice.
I have written on the subject of sacrifices in the following articles:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/response-to-rabbi-eli-cohen-on-blood.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/hezekiah-and-manasseh-blood-atonement.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/response-to-rabbi-asher-meza-blood.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/response-to-jono-vandor-and-jason.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/response-to-jono-vandor-and-jason_13.html

The subject of a "man dying for our sins" has already been addressed. I will be calling on the Name of the True God YHWH, but if does that, I have to reject Erano as a false prophet whom YHWH has NOT sent.

Erano then claims that 1 Kings 8:41-43 speaks of himself. Let's read in context:
"41 “As for the foreigner who does not belong to your people Israel but has come from a distant land because of your name— 42 for they will hear of your great name and your mighty hand and your outstretched arm—when they come and pray toward this temple, 43 then hear from heaven, your dwelling place. Do whatever the foreigner asks of you, so that all the peoples of the earth may know your name and fear you, as do your own people Israel, and may know that this house I have built bears your Name."

There isn't a prophet from the Gentiles mentioned, all it is Solomon asking YHWH to grant a Gentiles request so that all the people come to YHWH and know that the temple has his name in him, it has nothing to do with a Pilipino whose interpretation of the scripture has less coherence than a Final Fantasy plot device. Final Fantasy's plot twists and storylines make much more sense this false prophet's butchery and distortion of the biblical text.

Revelation 3:12 has Jesus relaying his message to John where he writes the name of his God on the city and his people. Though Revelation doesn't explicitly say this, the name is obviously YHWH. Interestingly Erano shoots himself in the foot by quoting Christ's Revelation 22:16 and Revelation 3:12 to validate his ministry. Wait a minute; didn't Erano just spend the entire article trying to say the apostles and Jesus were responsible for deceiving the human race into believing a lie? Wow, He really is inconsistent, and he claims to be a prophet of God? Now prophets can make mistakes and repent, but this guy is claiming what he receives is revelation given to him.

Also, Erano earlier claimed the Comforter sent by Jesus was himself, Yet he claims Jesus was a flat out deceiver who failed in his mission, What is this guy on? Is Jesus a righteous servant, or a nefarious deceiver, which is it Erano? If Jesus was successful and not a deceiver, you are guilty of bearing false witness against him and stand condemned as a false prophet. If Jesus failed and was in fact a nefarious deceiver, then you are telling me a deceiver told me about you? Then why should I trust his testimony about you? or your own testimony. Now obviously I believe Jesus was not a deceiver or a failure, but that still wouldn't incline me to follow Erano because he contradicts the message of Christ and the OT Prophets.

Jesus DID accomplish the mission he was given, THUS he is worthy of the name Jesus and Immanuel, he did not forfeit the titles or names that were given to him. Again, Is Jesus good enough to prove Erano or Not? Also, the people of Israel ALREADY knew the name of God, YHWH and through Christ some were brought to repentance whereas others were hardened.

It is claimed that by Erano that Jesus is Lucifer, which we established is not the case. Revelation 3:12 is not a "new name given to him" as Erano puts it. Erano also claims:
" Jesus said: The reason for the killings between the opposing religions and nations is that they do not know the real God and his real (Jesus') identity- which is now LUCIFER. 

To prove it: If you ask people how many gods are there; they will answer: there is only one God! They are united or unified in their response. 

When asked about His name, they will give you many names, and they will fight over it. 

It only shows that they don't really know God. Jesus himself reveals that this is one of the reasons for the curse and the fighting in the world. "

Lie, Jesus actually warned us about wars and fighting building up in the last days. Whether Christians refer to God as YHWH or just call him God is IRRELEVANT. This would not prove Erano to be a true prophet at all. Even a false prophet can affirm YHWH's Name or Jesus' Name AND STILL BE UTTERLY CONDEMNED FOR NOT OBEYING HIM!!!

Jesus' new name is NOT Lucifer, he was NOT given a new name, he is talking about putting his God's name ON THE CITY AND BELIEVERS!!! Also, if Erano wants to say: "In what God commanded the prophet John to write about Jesus’ statement in Revelation 22:16, God is making known to us that Jesus is the “morning star” or Lucifer. With this assertion, God makes null and void, ALL the writings of his (Jesus) apostles about his so-called ‘divinity’ and second coming!", then that means Erano CANNOT validate his own prophethood unless he is going to be inconsistent, which of course he will be.

Although he says: "It is true, Jesus even before he was punished, had spoken about a coming “Helper” who will be sent by God to testify about himself ." He then completely changes gear and says the writings of the apostles are made null and void. If the divinity of Christ and the second coming are nullified, then he cannot appeal to the Gospels or the apostle’s letters to show Jesus to be a deceiver. Erano is a walking talking contradiction.

Erano then claims that Jesus spoke of the comforter in the context of John 5:30-31, No he didn't, read the context:

"19 Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22 Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.

24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life. 25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.

28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned. 30 By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me.
Testimonies About Jesus

31 “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true. 32 There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is true.

33 “You have sent to John and he has testified to the truth. 34 Not that I accept human testimony; but I mention it that you may be saved. 35 John was a lamp that burned and gave light, and you chose for a time to enjoy his light."

The one who testifies of Jesus in this passage is not the Comforter of John 14 at all. The Father is the one bearing witness of the Son, and WHAT did the Father say about Jesus in Mark 9:7? This is my son, LISTEN TO HIM!!! Not to some crackpot who claims to be a prophet like Moses yet contradicts himself all over the place. Jesus is saying that is witness on his own isn't sufficient but he has the Father's backing, no need for Erano to come.

Erano then claims HE is the branch of Isaiah 11:1-2, which is WRONG, both Jews and Christians despite their differences will acknowledge that this is a passage about the Messiah.
"11 A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse;
    from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.
2 The Spirit of the Lord will rest on him—
    the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding,
    the Spirit of counsel and of might,
    the Spirit of the knowledge and fear of the Lord—"

The Branch is also a Messianic title, found in Rabbinic Literature and is used of the Messiah. Also the Branch comes from the House of David which obviously Erano doesn't so that disqualifies him.

"3 and he will delight in the fear of the Lord.

He will not judge by what he sees with his eyes,
    or decide by what he hears with his ears;
4 but with righteousness he will judge the needy,
    with justice he will give decisions for the poor of the earth.
He will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth;
    with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked."
It is claimed that the apostles are the wicked being slain and exposed, Rubbish, I already pointed out WHO the Branch is, so immediately the apostles are not the ones to be slain here. For that matter since Erano quoted Revelation 22:16 where Jesus says he is the offspring of David, so he cannot come back and say that Jesus or the apostles stand condemned by the passage in Isaiah 11.

As for the wolf lying with the ram reference, that simply refers to the state of the animals being changed, so much so that creatures can co-exist peacefully without devouring once another.

Next we come to Jeremiah 1:4-5. Erano rightly points out it is not Jesus in Jeremiah 1:4-5 and Christians don't claim that. It's not Erano either, read who YHWH is speaking too:

"1 The words of Jeremiah son of Hilkiah, one of the priests at Anathoth in the territory of Benjamin. 2 The word of the Lord came to him in the thirteenth year of the reign of Josiah son of Amon king of Judah, 3 and through the reign of Jehoiakim son of Josiah king of Judah, down to the fifth month of the eleventh year of Zedekiah son of Josiah king of Judah, when the people of Jerusalem went into exile.
The Call of Jeremiah

4 The word of the Lord came to me, saying,

5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew[a] you,
    before you were born I set you apart;
    I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

6 “Alas, Sovereign Lord,” I said, “I do not know how to speak; I am too young.”

7 But the Lord said to me, “Do not say, ‘I am too young.’ You must go to everyone I send you to and say whatever I command you. 8 Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you and will rescue you,” declares the Lord.

9 Then the Lord reached out his hand and touched my mouth and said to me, “I have put my words in your mouth. 10 See, today I appoint you over nations and kingdoms to uproot and tear down, to destroy and overthrow, to build and to plant.”"

Jeremiah is subject of the passage in question. Also, not knowing how to speak has NOTHING to do with not knowing the Bible, Jeremiah was called for ministry and didn't know what to say to the people of Israel, thus YHWH would assist him and use Jeremiah as his instrument for his good purpose. Nothing about a prophet from the Philippines at all. The section is a PRESENT event in Jeremiah's life, not something that will happen later.

Isaiah 59:18-21 is the final passage that is misused by Erano. I'll quickly say that Isaiah 11:7-9 is in the end times, not speaking of Erano at all, I already established that, not to mention in that passage the animal's natures are changed, so much so the animals won't even consume meat.

Anyway, let's take a look at Isaiah 59:18-21
"18 According to what they have done,
    so will he repay
wrath to his enemies
    and retribution to his foes;
    he will repay the islands their due.
19 From the west, people will fear the name of the Lord,
    and from the rising of the sun, they will revere his glory.
For he will come like a pent-up flood
    that the breath of the Lord drives along.[a]

20 “The Redeemer will come to Zion,
    to those in Jacob who repent of their sins,”
declares the Lord.

21 “As for me, this is my covenant with them,” says the Lord. “My Spirit, who is on you, will not depart from you, and my words that I have put in your mouth will always be on your lips, on the lips of your children and on the lips of their descendants—from this time on and forever,” says the Lord."

There is nothing about a prophet from the Philippines. It simply refers to people from both the east and the west coming to acknowledge that YHWH is God and there is no other. Also, Paul quotes that passage in verse 20 and applies it to Christ, so there is a Messianic application in the passage. I speak on this passage briefly in my response to Eli Cohen which can be found here: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/response-to-rabbi-eli-cohen-on-blood.html

Also, Here is an unreasonable criteria that Maestro sets against his critics:
" Any Bible scholar, preacher or religious leader who intends to question Maestro Eraño Martin Evangelista’s Bible revelations in the websites about the true Name of God and the real Jesus based on the scriptures,  that person must first show the whole world his/her authority from God.  

Any person who intends to question Maestro Evangelista and says that he/she was able to know the scripture through personal study or from a university or Bible colleges, automatically admits that he/she is not the one sent by God and therefore a false prophet.   The credentials they possess are not from God and not found in the scriptures."

Having a personal study or going to a university doesn't disqualify you from teaching the Word of God. Of course, this depends on the university you go to but that aside, I don't claim to be a prophet. Furthermore, Maestro CANNOT prove himself from the scripture. He may claim that a true prophecy can be found in his testimony, but ONE prophecy that is true DOESN'T validate you. Anyone can claim to be a prophet like Moses. One prophecy in your testimony is not enough to claim to be a prophet like Moses. So I can reject your assertions and question them.

I hope this article has been of some use to you guys and I hope you will not be led astray by this wicked son of Satan and it is one of my prayers that those led astray by Erano, may be set free from his tyrannical scare tactics.

Stay tuned for more articles in the future.

Answering Judaism.