Friday, 28 February 2014

An examination of "THE PROPHECY OF GOOD AGAINST EVIL": Expose of Maestro Erano M Evangelista 5

Still continuing with our response to Erano on the claims he makes in his articles.

""they will be my people" - Who are they? Who will have the privilege to be called "people of God" and to call God as "Father?"
"Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, 
against the man who is close to me!" 
declares the LORD Almighty. 
"Strike the shepherd, 
and the sheep will be scattered, 
and I will turn my hand against the little ones. 
Zechariah 13:7 (NIV)
   The "shepherd" was Jesus, we already know it. 

"sheep" - Jesus' apostles. 

"little ones" - the religions, and the anger of God is great on these people.
In the whole land," declares the LORD, 
"two-thirds will be struck down and perish; 
yet one-third will be left in it. 
Zechariah 13:8 (NIV)
   They will be destroyed in time, who will remain?
This third I will bring into the fire; I will refine them like silver 
and test them like gold. They will call on my name 
and I will answer them; I will say, 'They are my people,' 
and they will say, 'The LORD is our God.' "
Zechariah 13:9 (NIV)
   They will call on the Name of God, and God will answer them and will be called the New People of God. 

   Will the prophecy be fulfilled?
The LORD will be king over the whole earth. 
On that day there will be one LORD, and his name the only name.
Zechariah 14:9 (NIV)
"On that day" - it will surely happen. 

"one" - when the merging of "the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and of animals" is complete - then they will be the New People of God.. 

   Without knowing the true Name of God, any law or covenant that is not signed - is not binding. 

   We are fortunate that the Name of God will be revealed in our time through "the foreigner," Maestro Eraño M. Evangelista, as it was prophesied in the Holy Bible, the Word of God. 

   Let us return to the prophecy again:
At this I awoke and looked around. My sleep had been pleasant to me. 
Jeremiah 31:26 (NIV)
   This is the condition of the people of the world at present; they are still asleep with the teachings of the religions. We are going to wake them up now... "

Jeremiah is awakening from a dream, it is not speaking about any religion putting people to sleep. With respect to the subject of Zechariah 13, false prophets are mentioned with respect to the subject them realising they shouldn't be doing things, but from verse 7 onwards, we come across a shepherd who struck down by the LORD. Now who does it speak about in verse 7? One commentary called the freebiblecommentary proposes the following:

"13:7 There is an obvious radical break between Zech. 13:6 and 7. As 13:6 refers to false prophets, 13:7 refers to the coming Messiah. Notice in your translation that Zech. 13:1-6 is in prose, while Zech. 13:7-9 is poetry. This poetry is definitely related to Zech. 11:4-14, which describes the godly shepherd.

▣ "Awake" This is a Qal IMPERATIVE (BDB 734, KB 802).
▣ "O sword" This is obviously a personification of death (cf. the VOCATIVE is also used in Jer. 47:6-7 in a military sense). Notice that God is the spokesman. God is the One who strikes the Shepherd. The terms "awake" and "sword," in Zech. 13:7a, are both FEMININE, while the word "strike" in Zech. 13:7d is Hiphil IMPERATIVE MASCULINE SINGULAR (BDB 645, KB 697) and refers to God striking the shepherd (i.e., vicarious substitutionary atonement, cf. Isa. 53:10; Acts 2:23; 2 Cor. 5:21).

▣ "My Shepherd" This is an obvious reference to the Davidic king (cf. Zech. 12:10). "Shepherd" originally referred to God (cf. Psalm 23), but it is later used of the leaders of Israel (cf. Ezekiel 34). It is used in the NT to describe the Messiah (cf. John 10).

▣ "And against the man, My Associate" The NIV translates this "and against the man who is close to me." This is obviously a reference to a close associate (BDB 765). This is why identifying this shepherd with the one in Zech. 11:17 is misleading. This term (BDB 765) is used only here and in the book of Leviticus (cf. Lev. 5:21; 18:20; 19:15,17; 24:19; 25:14,15). It obviously means a close friend or covenant neighbor.

▣ "strike the shepherd" This VERB (BDB 645, KB 697) is a Hiphil IMPERATIVE.
▣ "that the sheep may be scattered" The VERB (BDB 806 I, KB 918) is a Qal IMPERFECT used as a JUSSIVE. This is used as a fulfillment of the cursing section of Deut. 28:64. Jesus makes an allusion to this when He was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane (cf. Matt. 26:31; Mark 14:27).

▣ "I will turn My hand against the little ones" The VERB (BDB 996 [top of, p. 999], KB 1427, Hiphil PERFECT) is used especially of God's judgment (cf. Isa. 1:25; Zech. 13:7; Ps. 81:15). The phrase "the little ones" is parallel to "the sheep," which are scattered in the previous verse. This must be a time of testing initiated by God Himself.

13:8 "That two parts in it will be cut off and perish; But the third will be left in it" This seems to refer to some type of punishment by God where two-thirds of the people perish. This is either a reference to a military invasion or to the spiritual rejection of the Messiah by two-thirds of God's people. Again, the time setting is ambiguous.
13:9   "And I will bring the third part through the fire,
Refine them as silver is refined,
And test them as gold is tested"
This refers to the purpose of refining (BDB 864, cf. Mal. 3:2) for strengthening (cf. Isa. 48:10; Dan. 11:35). YHWH wants a purified people who reflect His character! This use of the metallurgical term is quite common in the Bible to describe God testing His people (i.e., the faithful remnant) for approval (cf. Pro. 17:3; Isa. 1:25; 48:10).

▣ "They will call on My name, And I will answer them; I will say, 'They are My people,' And they will say, 'The Lord is my God'" This is a series of covenant phrases (e.g., Hos. 2:19-23) to describe that in the midst of God's judgment on the shepherd and the sheep, His purpose is a stronger covenant relationship (cf. Zech. 8:8).""

Also another thing to consider is this, If Zechariah 13:7 to the end of the chapter is Jesus, what reason is he struck down for? Well you find the answer in Isaiah 53. He is struck down for our sins, not his own, because "he (Jesus) who knew no sin became sin"

Anthony Rogers in an article also makes this observation with respect to this passage:
"A third passage in Zechariah of some significance is found in Zechariah 13 and is closely related to the passage in Zechariah 12. For just as Yahweh said in 12:10 that He would be pierced, so in Zechariah 13 we are told not only that false prophets, by the Lord’s decree, will come to such a fate, i.e. they would be pierced through, but even the Shepherd of Yahweh would experience a terrible fate, no doubt the piercing mentioned in 12:10, and back of it would be the Lord’s own sword. Most significantly for present purposes is the fact that “the Shepherd,” –indeed, “My Shepherd,” – is identified by Yahweh not only as one distinct from Himself, but as “My Associate.” " (http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2012/05/ijaz-ahmad-vs-prophet-zechariah.html Anthony Rogers)

Although Rogers comment is in the context of the Trinity, it speaks on the fate that Jesus suffers, but certainly he doesn't link his death to that of a false prophet. 

Jesus was falsely accused being a deceiver, even though it is clear no guile or deceit was found in his mouth.

I may consider writing on the subject of Zechariah 13 and if it condemns Christ or not in another article if the Lord Wills.

Regarding Zechariah 14:9, it refers to an event in the end times, since Zechariah 14 as a whole functions as an end time prophecy:

"14 A day of the Lord is coming, Jerusalem, when your possessions will be plundered and divided up within your very walls.

2 I will gather all the nations to Jerusalem to fight against it; the city will be captured, the houses ransacked, and the women raped. Half of the city will go into exile, but the rest of the people will not be taken from the city. 3 Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights on a day of battle. 4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south. 5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake[a] in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

6 On that day there will be neither sunlight nor cold, frosty darkness. 7 It will be a unique day—a day known only to the Lord—with no distinction between day and night. When evening comes, there will be light.

8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter.

9 The Lord will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one Lord, and his name the only name.

10 The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up high from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses, and will remain in its place. 11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

12 This is the plague with which the Lord will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths. 13 On that day people will be stricken by the Lord with great panic. They will seize each other by the hand and attack one another. 14 Judah too will fight at Jerusalem. The wealth of all the surrounding nations will be collected—great quantities of gold and silver and clothing. 15 A similar plague will strike the horses and mules, the camels and donkeys, and all the animals in those camps.

16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, they will have no rain. 18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The Lord[b] will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles.

20 On that day holy to the Lord will be inscribed on the bells of the horses, and the cooking pots in the Lord’s house will be like the sacred bowls in front of the altar. 21 Every pot in Jerusalem and Judah will be holy to the Lord Almighty, and all who come to sacrifice will take some of the pots and cook in them. And on that day there will no longer be a Canaanite[c] in the house of the Lord Almighty."

I have already spoken on the subject of the feasts so I needn't make that point again, but in verse 9, it refers there being only YHWH God himself, with all the competition eliminated. Jews and Gentiles who have put their trust in Christ will be united as one people, loved by God for eternity and it doesn't refer to a fanatical cult run by Erano. Zechariah 13:9 even refers to the preservation of the Jews, not only at the time of Zechariah, but also those who put their faith in Yeshua after his death and resurrection.

Also regarding the animals offspring and men's offspring, I draw your attention back to what it says again.

"23 This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: “When I bring them back from captivity,[c] the people in the land of Judah and in its towns will once again use these words: ‘The Lord bless you, you prosperous city, you sacred mountain.’ 24 People will live together in Judah and all its towns—farmers and those who move about with their flocks. 25 I will refresh the weary and satisfy the faint.”

26 At this I awoke and looked around. My sleep had been pleasant to me.

27 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will plant the kingdoms of Israel and Judah with the offspring of people and of animals. 28 Just as I watched over them to uproot and tear down, and to overthrow, destroy and bring disaster, so I will watch over them to build and to plant,” declares the Lord. 29 “In those days people will no longer say,

‘The parents have eaten sour grapes,
    and the children’s teeth are set on edge.’
30 Instead, everyone will die for their own sin; whoever eats sour grapes—their own teeth will be set on edge.

31 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
    “when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
    and with the people of Judah.
32 It will not be like the covenant
    I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
    to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
    though I was a husband to[d] them,[e]”
declares the Lord.
33 “This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel
    after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds
    and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
    and they will be my people.
34 No longer will they teach their neighbor,
    or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
    from the least of them to the greatest,”
declares the Lord.
“For I will forgive their wickedness
    and will remember their sins no more.”"

Once again, the animals and humans being planted in the land simply refers to Israel and Judah being repopulated again. It has nothing to do with the merging of the animals and man.

Here are some more objections to address in Erano's article, we have quite a way to go.

"Let us return to the prophecy again:
At this I awoke and looked around. My sleep had been pleasant to me. 
Jeremiah 31:26 (NIV)
   This is the condition of the people of the world at present; they are still asleep with the teachings of the religions. We are going to wake them up now... 

"pleasant" - because the teachings of the religions regarding miracles, resurrection and the eternal life are deceitful.
"The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will plant the house 
of Israel and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and of animals.
Jeremiah 31:27 (NIV)
   The people of the "first creation" will be merged with the people of the "second creation."
Just as I watched over them to uproot and tear down, and to overthrow, destroy and bring disaster, so I will watch over them to build and to plant," declares the LORD. 
Jeremiah 31:28 (NIV)
   This is what the "first creation" had suffered; are we not experiencing them at present? 
Jeremiah is awakening from a dream in the context and those whom YHWH is watching over are the people of Israel and Judah, he is not speaking of a "first" or "second" creation at all. Where is he getting this esoteric babbling from? It is talking about the judgement that the Israelites experienced as a result of their sin and their promised restoration of the people in the future.

   And when the people of the “first creation” are merged with the people the "second creation," what will happen?
"In those days people will no longer say, 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, 
and the children's teeth are set on edge.' Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever eats sour grapes - his own teeth will be set on edge. 
Jeremiah 31:29 (NIV)
   The deceptive teachings of the religions will be no more.
Just as I watched over them to uproot and tear down, and to overthrow, destroy and bring disaster, so I will watch over them to build and to plant," declares the LORD. 
Jeremiah 31:28 (NIV)"
Jeremiah 31:29 is talking about a proverb that is spoken by the people which will never be used again. It is not speaking of a future religion that is coming. Also, his point about original sin is addressed here: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/an-examination-of-prophecy-of-good_26.html

"Let us read God's instruction:
For this is what you asked of the LORD your God at Horeb on the 
day of the assembly when you said, "Let us not hear the voice of 
the LORD our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die." 
Deuteronomy 18:16 (NIV)
   This was the request made by the people to Moses regarding God. What was God's answer?
The LORD said to me: "What they say is good. 
Deuteronomy 18:17 (NIV)
   God will not be heard directly by His people anymore. The time of God's direct communication with the people has ended."

In the context, the people are realising who YHWH is and his infinite majesty is also recognised. They demonstrate that they fear God and that God will send prophets on his behalf to deliver a message to them and communicate his word to them. YHWH is talking about a prophetic office that will be established in Israel at the request of the Israelites and of course this prophetic office culminates with the coming of Yeshua or Jesus.

   "Who will speak to the people in behalf of God?
I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; 
I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 
Deuteronomy 18:18 (NIV)
   God will send a prophet who is like Moses; where will he come from? 

"from among their brothers" - he will be from among the people of the "first creation" not from the people of Israel, the "second creation." 

"I will put my words in his mouth" - this makes him different from Moses. 

   What will be known from this prophet?
If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account.
Deuteronomy 18:19 (NIV)
   He will speak to the people of the world in God's Name."
From among their brothers refers to the ISRAELITES in context, not to Gentiles, be it Arab, European or Philipino. The prophets like Moses would not be Gentiles from the Philippines. The only exceptions would be converts to Judaism, namely Elijah the Tishbite. The words that are put in the prophets mouth refer to the words of God, it doesn't mean the prophets are different from Moses.

   "Why? What happened before that His people need to see His Name?
Then Jeremiah said to all the people, including the women, "Hear the word of the LORD, all you people of Judah in Egypt. This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: You and your wives have shown by your actions what you promised when you said, 'We will certainly carry out the vows we made to burn incense and pour out drink offerings to the Queen of Heaven.' 
"Go ahead then, do what you promised! Keep your vows! 
Jeremiah 44:24-25 (NIV)
   The people of Moses even in the time of their sojourn in Egypt have worshipped other gods, like the “queen of heaven,” which even in our time is also being worshipped, in the form of Mary, the mother of Jesus, who has the title of Queen of Heaven and Earth."

Actually, it's the apostate Roman Catholic Church that gives hyperdulia to Mary, Not Biblical Christianity. They don't call it worship and they don't believe Mary is a divine being but nevertheless, they are giving her an honour that she didn't consider herself worthy of.

   "But what did God give to them?
But hear the word of the LORD, all Jews living in Egypt: 'I swear by my great name,' says the LORD, 'that no one from Judah living anywhere in Egypt will ever again invoke my name or swear, "As surely as the Sovereign LORD lives."
Jeremiah 44:26 (NIV)
   God gave the people of Judah in Egypt a curse that they may never say or invoke the Name of God. The curse is still in effect at present so that the Jews don't know and can't say the true Name of God. They can only use "Hashem" or “The Name” to substitute for the real Name of God."

Let's correct the misrepresentation of the Jewish position first. The reason they substitute the name YHWH with Ha Shem, is out of respect, and it is out of fear of using his name in vain. That's Erano's first error. Second, the curse in question is only referring to a specific group of Judeans, not all of the people of Judah.

   "And to the people of the world, the religions also never knew the Name of God because they are not the ones sent by God to reveal His True Name. So, we find the religions invoking the names YHWH, Yahweh, Jehovah, El, Elohim, Adonai, until they try to make the people familiar with the name "Yeshua" or "Yashua" the Hebrew name of Jesus, as the other name for God. This is the last deception. 

   There will be only one man, a prophet, who will come, not born from the people of Israel, who will reveal and introduce the Name of God to the people of the world. He can do it because he is not covered by the curse God has given to the people of Judah!"

Let's repeat a statement I have already made in the past regarding this:

"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?" (http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/the-true-authority-and-true-glory-of.html)

Erano is not the prophet like Moses, the fact he is not even from a Semitic nation automatically disqualifies him for the role.

The next point Erano makes is he tries to misquote 1 Kings 8:41-43 to try and prove his prophetic credentials. The article here addresses what 1 Kings 8:41-43 actually talks about: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/how-erano-evangelista-deceived-humanity.html. It also addresses his misuse of Jeremiah 1:4-10 to try and say it was about him.

"God spoke to Moses of a prophet "like you" meaning this man will have a mission similar to Moses. 

   What did Moses bring? The Covenant between God and his people. Did it last? No. 

   Was it broken or severed? It was severed. Any covenant entered into should bear the names of both parties. Since the people of God, the people of Israel never knew the Name of God then; the covenant became invalid in time."

The validity of a covenant doesn't depend on Man's faithfulness, it depends on God's, so he is wrong when he said the covenant between God and his people became invalid for a time. God keeps his end of the deal, even if we don't. He promised to bless Israel if they obeyed and curse them if they disobeyed.

   "So “the foreigner" will come to reveal the Name of God and now it is reiterated again in:
The word of the LORD came to me, saying, 
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, 
before you were born I set you apart; 
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations." 
Jeremiah 1:4-5 (NIV)
   This prophecy was given to Jeremiah so that it may continue on until the appointed time.

“a prophet to the nations” - This is not Jeremiah, it speaks of a prophet that is sent to the nations of the world."

Jeremiah IS subject of the passage in question. HE is made a prophet to the nations. It would be nice if he read the verses beforehand.

   "Jeremiah was sent only to the people of Israel, as with the other prophets. This particular prophet is unique, a prophet to reveal the Word of God to all the nations of the world.
"Ah, Sovereign LORD," I said, "I do not know how to speak; I am only a child."
Jeremiah 1:6 (NIV)
   The prophet sent is not knowledgeable in the Holy Bible by the standards of religions, but what did God say?
But the LORD said to me, "Do not say, 'I am only a child.'
You must go to everyone I send you to and say whatever I command you.
Jeremiah 1:7 (NIV)
   If we would look at the present condition of the world, it will be the last prophet against the multitude of religions.
Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you and will rescue you," declares the LORD.
Jeremiah 1:8 (NIV)
   God will not forsake him."

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. The them are the Israelites whom Jeremiah was sent to and told not to be afraid of. It can also be an encouragement to Christians not to be afraid of those who desire to kill and destroy them for giving the Gospel.

"Then the LORD reached out his hand and touched my mouth and said to me,
"Now, I have put my words in your mouth.
Jeremiah 1:9 (NIV)
   This is the promise given by God to Moses, and is it true that this prophet is the same prophet who will build on what has been brought down?
See, today I appoint you over nations and kingdoms to uproot
and tear down, to destroy and overthrow, to build and to plant."
Jeremiah 1:10 (NIV)
   He is the prophet sent by God to fulfill the prophecy in:
"The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will plant the house
of Israel and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and of animals.
Jeremiah 31:27 (NIV)
   There will be a union of the people of the “first creation” and of the people of the “second creation.”
Just as I watched over them to uproot and tear down, and to overthrow, destroy and bring disaster, so I will watch over them to build and to plant," declares the LORD.
Jeremiah 31:28 (NIV)
   This is the mission of “the foreigner” who was promised to Moses."

The subject of Jeremiah 31:28-29 has already been covered as to what it is talking about, the same with the previous articles on those subjects.

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/an-examination-of-prophecy-of-good.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/an-examination-of-prophecy-of-good_26.html

http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/an-examination-of-prophecy-of-good_6292.html

That's it for this article for now. More arguments in the article "THE PROPHECY OF GOOD AGAINST EVIL" shall be saved for another time.

Answering Judaism.

Thursday, 27 February 2014

More Interesting Objections from the Rabbinic Camp

Here are some more objections by barry umansky that I intended to address for sometime. Let's get cracking shall we?

"1. The mitzvah simply states to have children. I will not enter a debate about the ecosystem as it presently exists. The argument wrt Jeremiah is an old one.
There are two ways to view this passage. First, this can be viewed as Jeremiah
being commanded by God not to marry at all. In this case, it would not accrue to him
as a transgression of the precept in Genesis 1:28. He had no choice other than to
obey God’s instructions.
Alternatively, the phrase "in this place" [in Hebrew, בַּמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה (ba’maQOM
ha’ZEH)] in verse 2 could be understood to imply that the order is tied to the
particular location for a specific reason, which is described elsewhere in the Book of Jeremiah. Hashem gave no such command to Jesus. He did not have children. He violated this mitzvah."

The fact remains that due to the earth being already filled as it is, it is still not a command for marriage for all people, my point stands. Furthermore, even if you want to argue Jeremiah did it in a specific time and place for the purpose of a mission, Jesus had a mission to accomplish, he didn't have the time to settle down, nor was it the reason he came to earth. If you want to argue that Jesus was violating Genesis 1:28, you are stuck with the fact that Jeremiah, despite not having children, EVEN IN a specific place, You have to toss Jeremiah out.

"2.The reason you may feel the reasoning wrt starvation is nonsensical is because you do not know Talmud and in your willingness to swallow the near universal vilification of the Pharisaic sect, hook line and sinker. The principal of pikuach nefesh means that any mitzvah including the Sabbath was over-riden if life was at stake. Just another silly ruling of those evil Pharisees. The NT is guilty of wholesale degradation and vilification of the Pharisees, an account which is contradicted by an examination of extra-biblical sources. Do I feel there may have been a few hypcriticial people among them. Sure. But the caricatures drawn in the NT are just propaganda-no different from the whitewash given to Pilate which also is contradicted by extra-biblical sources such as Philo and Josephus."

While Jesus condemned many of the Pharisees for their traditions, that doesn't mean he agreed with every tradition. For that matter, claiming the NT is contradicted by extra-biblical sources like Philo and Josephus' sources because Pilate acted a certain way, doesn't mean that he did NOT act that way. Historians only record what is relevant and important to them and their audience, selection and connection is what they do, same with respect to the Pharisees.

Furthermore, Where is Pilate whitewashed? He is held responsible for crucifying Jesus, even by Paul.

Barry does mention this tradition about the mitzvah above and it is a real tradition.

If a Jew needed to save his own life because of it being in danger, he could break any mitzvah, however he was not allowed to commit murder, idolatry or sexual immorality.

I wouldn't say that tradition is silly, but risky. Although, there are cases like this in the TANAKH, such an example would be when David feigned madness to save his life. But that's an assumption I am taking regarding that tradition.

"The fact is what Jesus was teaching was a violation of Shabbat- a form of agricultural labor. The Torah says if there is any dispute we should follow the ruling of the judges and in this period the Pharisees were the judges - they sat in Moses' seat. Twisting things around, Jesus admits they are the authority but then paints the picture everyone being hypocritical and not carrying out what they rule to the population at large- there is no basis for this in outside of the NT in the historical records that survive. Exodus 22:27 is another mitzvah not to curse a judge, not to revile a judge. How can you read what comes from the mouth of Jesus and not accept it as a violation of Hashem's commandment?"

Again, one should respect their leaders, but calling them out and exposing them for something they are doing is wrong and RIGHTLY calling them hypocrites and snakes is not speaking evil of them, even in the context of Exodus 22:27 (He actually meant Exodus 22:28 but that's a typo and we can all make mistakes and I have made some of my own.)
"28 “Do not blaspheme God[f] or curse the ruler of your people."

If you want to dismiss the NT when resorting to historical criteria, that's irresponsible, most information on Jesus' existence comes from the NT and those can be used in historical study, AS WELL AS OTHER SOURCES mentioned on the comments page.

Furthermore, you only obey a leader if what he says is righteous, in line with what God has revealed. Were the leaders of the people always righteous in their decrees?

Jesus even said to his disciples to listen to what the Pharisees have to say, but not to emulate their deeds because they were not practising what they preach, as found in Matthew 23:2-3.

"I will not get into a lengthy discussion of the word genea in reference to this generation. From what I have read it most commonly refers to contemporaries. A plain reading of the text leaves little doubt that Jesus was referring to his disciples .

Matthew 24 is quite consistent with Matthew 16:28-28 “Truly I tell YOU some who are standing HERE will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” Any attempt to rationalize genea to some future generation or to the nation of Jews is just that- a poor rationalization. His followers expected something immanent in their lifetimes. "

Genea CAN mean a future generation or race. It's not a poor rationalization. Again, the NT writers don't assert that Jesus' coming is imminent. They say it is soon, but not imminent.

"Finally, I do not find the commentaries you referenced convincing wrt honoring one's parents. The actions decribed seem disrespectful and in violation of the commandment."

That fine if you want to reject the commentaries, however my point still remains and Jesus did chastise some who did not care for their parents.

Hope this article helps.

Answering Judaism.

A return to Rabbinic Dilemma 101

This document I had never thought I'd be coming back to but it appears I need to look at some more objections that have been raised.

"barry umansky5 February 2014 20:25
I wanted to respond to an older post, so I will do so here as I surmise you probably would not notice a comment to what you posted last October. This is in reference to what you called a rabbinic dilemma regarding the genealogies in the NT. You wrote you did not see any evidence that would prevent Jesus inheriting the right to the Davidic throne via adoption thru Joseph. There are numerous problems with this position. 

First, although there are descriptions in the Torah which allude to an adoptive process, the institution of adoption was not legally defined in biblical times. I will refer to several instances to show that tribal lineage remained with the biological father.

Second, there is no reference in the NT to indicate that Joseph "adopted" Jesus."

Firstly, regarding the second point, If Jesus was born to Mary after the marriage of Joseph and Joseph looked after him as he would his own, that is adoption. The argument presented by barry is from silence.

The subject of the first point is elaborated on by barry in the comment.

"Third, Although the institution of adoption, through its widespread use in Roman law was well known in talmudic times, the codifiers of Jewish law denied that Jewish law recognized an institution of "adoption." Rather, they created an institution which did not change the legal status of the parents of the person whose custody has changed.

The Torah specifies that blood rights, such as tribal lineage, are transmitted exclusively from a father to his biological sons. Whenever the Israelites were selected to serve in the army, it was done "according to the house of their father":

Quote:
Numbers 1:17-18 - (17) Then Moses and Aaron took these men, who were indicated by [their] names, (18) and they assembled all the congregation on the first day of the second month, and they declared their pedigrees according to their families according to their fathers' houses; according to the number of names, a head count of every male from twenty years old and upward.
Similarly, the Aaronic Priesthood can only be transmitted from a father to his biological sons (Exodus 40:15; Numbers 25:12-13).

A Jew who was adopted into a family of a tribe other than his birth tribe does NOT take the tribe of the adopting family In Judaism an adopted child retains the tribe of his birth (if he had one). A girl retains her father's tribal status until such time as she marries outside of that tribe (and then she is a member of her husband's tribe).

In Ketuvim (Writings) we are told that Esther is adopted by her cousin Mordechai (Book of Esther 2:7). Esther's full name is used twice in the story --- and both times it is tied to her birth father (Esther daughter of Avihayil). (Book of Esther 2:15 and 9:29) -- in other words, she is called by the name of her biological father, not her adoptive father. 

Other instances include the adoption of Moses by Pharoah's daughter who later married Mered who was of the tribe of Judah. Yet Moses is always considered a Levite as of course was his older brother Aaron."

There is a problem with using Esther and Moses, they were already born in their respected context. Lets grant what barry is saying is right., Moses himself was still part of the Levitical lineage, that's fine. Esther herself was still the son of Avihayil or Abihail after his death, despite Mordecai taking her in. Unfortunatly for barry, this doesn't prove his case against Jesus. Mary had already been pledged to Joseph in marriage and after their ceremony, Jesus was born in a manger to Mary and because of Joseph consummating the marriage AFTER his birth, he is still considered part of Joseph's line and brought into it.

While Numbers 1:18 does mention the subject of men from their clans, it is speaking on the subject of military service and calling on individual men from those tribes to serve in that militia.

"This ruling is found in the Torah and is the underlying principle or halacha still being practiced today more than 3000 years. Unlike the Western legal tradition,
traditional halakhah contains
no provision for the legal incorporation
of an adopted child into her new
family. While adoption is viewed as
deeply admirable and to be encouraged,
it is not transformative of lineage
as it is in the Western legal system.
An adopted child’s status follows
that of his or her biological parents,
not that of the adoptive parent(s).

From your Trinitarian perspective, Jesus was "fathered" by the holy spirit- ie he has no tribal lineage. There is no firm evidence of adoption by Joseph and even if there was, tribal lineage cannot be passed on to the adopted child."

Jesus being "fathered by the Holy Spirit" is an incorrect statement, his physical body was concieved by the Spirit but he existed from eternity. I would also need to look at the subject of halacha before I can comment on that however. Again, the Torah doesn't leave adoption out of the question with respect to being accepted into a tribe.

Feel free to judge my words.

Wednesday, 26 February 2014

An examination of "THE PROPHECY OF GOOD AGAINST EVIL": Expose of Maestro Erano M Evangelista 4

Carrying on from where we left off, Erano once again raises the subject of "man cannot die for the sins of another" I have stated in the past regarding Exodus 33:11 and 30-31, Deuteronomy 24:16 and Ezekiel 18:20:
"Let's deal with this snake's (referring to Erano) 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 Deuternomy 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 possiblity of vicarious sacrifice is not out of the question."

There are other points he raises in Ezekiel such as the following:

   "God reiterated the commandment He had given to Moses regarding sins. There is no truth in the doctrine of "original sin." Adam and Eve committed sin in the Garden; they are the ones who received the punishment. The religions say the sins of Adam and Eve have gone to up to our generation. This is not true according what is written in the Holy Bible! 

   Let us read the elaboration of the commandment, and may we find the way to our salvation.
The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him. 
Ezekiel 18:20 (NIV)
   To sum it up, even Jesus cannot save us."

Such blasphemy, the last statement shows that Erano is one of the false prophets that Jesus himself warned about and told us to avoid. The abuse of Ezekiel 18 is already covered here: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/how-erano-evangelista-deceived-humanity.html

Original sin again doesn't say that a man is not responsible for his own evil and sin. God will hold that person to account if they refuse to repent.

   "When we commit sin, does God punish us right away?
"But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. 
Ezekiel 18:21 (NIV)
   No, God doesn't punish us right away; we are given the chance to redeem ourselves: reform and return to God. Other times, it is only when we have committed a sin, do we realize that it is wrong. 

   According to the teachings of the religions, our sins are recorded in heaven, is there truth in it?
None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. 
Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.
Ezekiel 18:22 (NIV)
   Maestro Eraño M. Evangelista says: there is no such thing. We only need to repent, change our ways and return to God. 

   Does God take pleasure in the death of a sinner?
Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 
Ezekiel 18:23 (NIV)
   God wants us to repent for our sins, reform and return to Him."

God does allow for time to repent yes, that is true. Also, WE DON'T DENY REPENTANCE. also to say "Maestro Eraño M. Evangelista says: there is no such thing. We only need to repent, change our ways and return to God." and use that as his licence to try to refute original sin, is borderline ridiculous.

    "What about Jesus, who knew the true teaching, committed a sin, what happened to him?
If a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin, 
he will die for it; because of the sin he has committed he will die.
Ezekiel 18:26 (NIV)
   Jesus, as he suffered on the cross, cried: "My God, My God, Why have you forsaken me?" - Psalm 22:1, Maestro Evangelista asks: was Jesus asking for forgiveness or was he blaming God? 

   He was blaming God on the cross; God did not answer him, and he was forsaken! 

   This is the time that we should wake up. 

   Does God want Jesus to die?
For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone,
declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!
Ezekiel 18:32 (NIV)
   Jesus died because he did not repent and did not ask forgiveness from God."

The subject of Psalm 22 and the misuse by Erano on that point has been covered here, as well as who Jesus died for: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/how-erano-evangelista-deceived-humanity.html

Jesus did not suffer on the cross for his own sin, he suffered for others, the article above addresses the point about Ezekiel 18 which refutes it's misuse and misapplication. Exodus 32 about Moses asking God to blot his name out is also covered there.

Lets go back to the subject of Jeremiah 31.

"Let us return to:
Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever eats sour grapes – 
his own teeth will be set on edge. 
Jeremiah 31:30 (NIV)
   No man can save another man with regard to sin; each and every one of us will have to ask forgiveness directly from God. What will happen next?
"The time is coming," declares the LORD, 
"when I will make a new covenant 
with the house of Israel 
and with the house of Judah. 
Jeremiah 31:31 (NIV)
"The time is coming" - in our present generation."

No, the New Covenent has already been ushered in and it made with the Jews, Jesus even says the blood of the new covenent which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins, as found in the Lord's Supper. Plus the argument about the subject of the grape Proverb has already been refuted.

""a new covenant" - why "new?"
"The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will plant the house
of Israel and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and of animals.
Jeremiah 31:27 (NIV)
   This will be the new covenant between God and his new people, the people of the world.

   How is it different?
It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers 
when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, 
because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them," 
declares the LORD.
Jeremiah 31:32 (NIV)
   This is how God described His former people: they did not remain faithful to Him.
"This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel 
after that time," declares the LORD. 
"I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. 
I will be their God, and they will be my people. 
Jeremiah 31:33 (NIV)
   God is now mentioning only one house. This is the merging of "the house of Israel and the house of Judah with "the offspring of men and of animals." God will consider them all as the new people of God."

The New covenant's difference with the Old is unlike the Old where the law was on a tablet, it would be written into the hearts of the Jews so they could live holy lives, the circumcision of the heart. I also speak on certain issues pertaining to the New Covenant such as Gentiles grafted in and the Torah which I think may be interesting to you guys. It's a response to Asher Meza on the nature of the New Covenant that may interest you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k5y6gt-OOQ

Some issues raised in that video will also be covered here. As for "the offspring of men and animals" do I need repeat my self on the repopulation of the land?

   "What will we find in them?
No longer will a man teach his neighbor, 
or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the LORD,' 
because they will all know me, 
from the least of them to the greatest," 
declares the LORD. 
"For I will forgive their wickedness 
and will remember their sins no more." 
Jeremiah 31:34 (NIV)
"Know the LORD" - the new people will know God and His Great Name. "
The name of YHWH, That's the name that shall be known to the nations. This process of the least to the greatest person knowing God is gradual, it is not something that will happen immediately and is happening over all the earth with the gospel coming to all nations and bringing people into the knowledge of the God of Israel.
   "What kind of an era? It will be a time when no man can deceive another man regarding the truth about God.
This is what the LORD says, he who appoints the sun 
to shine by day, who decrees the moon and stars 
to shine by night, who stirs up the sea 
so that its waves roar - the LORD Almighty is his name: 
Jeremiah 31:35 (NIV)
"the LORD Almighty" - the title ascribed to God, because He doesn't give reprieve to His enemies.
"Only if these decrees vanish from my sight," 
declares the LORD, 
"will the descendants of Israel ever cease 
to be a nation before me."
Jeremiah 31:36 (NIV)
   In the end, there will only be one nation that will stand in the world, because all the other nations will come to it and join to become one nation with it, the New People of God.
 Let us read again:
"This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel 
after that time," declares the LORD. 
"I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. 
I will be their God, and they will be my people. 
Jeremiah 31:33 (NIV)"

The nation that is mentioned in Jeremiah 31:31 is speaking of the Jewish people and the Covenant made with them. However, they need to repent and turn to Christ otherwise they will not be recipients of the New Covenant. Gentiles do not have this covenant made with them, they need to be grafted into the covenant itself. The covenant was made with Jews, not Gentiles.

We shall move onto the next section in another article.

Answering Judaism.

An examination of "THE PROPHECY OF GOOD AGAINST EVIL": Expose of Maestro Erano M Evangelista 3

Under the normal circumstances, I try to look at what Erano says and then write a response based of what I have seen providing quotes here and there, for time and space reasons. However with this particular article that isn't the case. Regardless we'll take a look at more of what he said

"A Commandment for Adam
And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, .
for when you eat of it you will surely die." 
Genesis 2:16-17 (NIV)
"the man" – was given a commandment, he is the only one in the Garden; he is different from the people created in the sixth day of Creation. They are outside of the Garden of Eden.

   Is it true?
God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." 
Genesis 1:28(NIV)
   Maestro Evangelista says, God gave a commandment for the "man" - Adam. The decree is from God to Adam only, one on one. This separates the man from the people of the "first creation," he has a commandment and they don’t have any.
The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him." Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name.
So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field. But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 
Genesis 2:18-20 (NIV)
   He started to give names, meaning his intelligence and knowledge is increasing. God saw the man was still alone... "

Again, There is no differentiation between the people of the "first creation" and Adam. Adam was created on the 6th Day and was the first man. The command to be fruitful and multiply was given to man generally, but doesn't mean every man is obligated to be married and have kids, but that's another issue. The point is it is given to man generally. Also, Man was not outside the Garden of Eden UNTIL the fall of man, so once again, the "prophet" is once again in severe error.

"The Creation of Eve
So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he 
was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 
Genesis 2:21 (NIV)
"a deep sleep" - this passage can only be explained and understood in our present generation, 

   The man was sedated, as he is prepared for a procedure that is similar during surgical operations in our time!
Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had 
taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 
Genesis 2:22 (NIV)
   The woman was created. This was another of God's special creations, unlike in the time of the 7 day Creation; “male and female” were created at the same time. 

   Maestro Evangelista says: This is the revelation that God created the man, which we call Adam, and the woman, called Eve, to be apart from the first people of the world. We are fortunate, we are the living witnesses regarding this revelation, others who came before never knew about it. 

   Adam is special to God, and the promise is with him alone, not to the people living outside of the Garden of Eden. "

Let's read Genesis 1 again:
"26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them."

What Chapter 1 speaks about in it's content is WHEN the human race was first created, Chapter 2 speaks on HOW man was created, it is the same event told but giving details in a given context, how the man and the woman were born. There isn't a time in those two chapters when one human race is born and then another afterwards. I don't even know what he is on about when he says "this passage can only be explained and understood in our present generation, "

"To differentiate the First Creation from the Second or Special Creation, let us continue our reading:
Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. 
She said, "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man." Later she 
gave birth to his brother Abel. Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. 
Genesis 4:1-2 (NIV)
   After Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden, they settled at the place where Adam was taken from. This was a time when the number or population of the people of the First Creation has grown. They had two sons, Cain and Abel.

   Let us read here:
Now Cain said to his brother Abel, "Let's go out to the field." And while they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him. 
Then the LORD said to Cain, "Where is your brother Abel?" 
"I don't know," he replied. "Am I my brother's keeper?" The LORD said, "What have you done? Listen! Your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground. 
Genesis 4:8-10 (NIV)
   God knew Cain murdered Abel...
Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand. When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth." 
Cain said to the LORD, "My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me."
Genesis 4:11-14 (NIV)
"whoever finds me will kill me" - if we are to follow the teachings of the religions that Adam and Eve were the first people in the world, who will kill Cain, his father and his mother?

   As it was mentioned, "whoever" - anyone or anybody that is alive then, meaning there are other people that abound in his time."

Quite simply, It is safe to assume that Adam and Eve had other children and that presumably their families had grown. Although scripture doesn't mention this detail, there isn't a problem. Incest WAS allowed for a time, but not permanently and Erano accuses "the religions" of adding to the Bible which he has no basis in saying so considering he himself doesn't even know what rubbish is coming out of his mouth. The Lemony Snicket film has much more coherence that the error ridden website of Erano I have been responding to in my articles.

   "What did God do to him?
But the LORD said to him, "Not so; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over." Then the LORD put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. So Cain went out from the LORD's presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden. 
Genesis 4:15-16 (NIV)
“if anyone kills Cain” – indeed, there were other people aside from them in their time. 

"the LORD put a mark on Cain" - here again the promise of God to Adam is given again to his descendant. 

   When Cain settled in the land of Nod, what happened?
Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.
Genesis 4:17-18 (NIV)
   Where did the wife of Cain come from? The priest, pastors and ministers gave the answer long ago: It was his sister, born from his mother Eve! They added that Adam and Eve had a daughter after Cain and Abel. 

   Would it mean that the religions tell us that Cain committed incest? 

   Let us prove if the religions’ teaching regarding this matter is true or not. Let us read in the Holy Bible regarding the third child of Adam and Eve. Who was the third child of Adam and Eve? Did they have a daughter after Cain and Abel?
Adam lay with his wife again, and she gave birth to a son and named him Seth, saying, "God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him."
Genesis 4:25 (NIV)
   The next child was also a son! The religions were wrong, they added again to the teachings in the Holy Bible. 

   So, it would only mean that during Adam and Eve's time, there were plenty of people already living about in the world, though they are not that numerous as today. 

   Thus, the doctrine regarding the story of Creation by the religions has been invalidated! The teachings of the religions are proven false from the beginning. How can we be certain that their teachings will be true up to the end?"

The mark of Cain, though we don't know if physical or spiritual, was a warning to all not to kill Cain or they would suffer a punishment more severe than his. The mark of Cain has no connection to Adam either, that is an eisegetical reading that is forced onto the text by Erano himself. So "The religions" are not wrong. There are certain details the Bible leaves out and doesn't include because it isn't necessarily an important detail that has to be there.

   "To sum it up, the first creation, called of "men & animals," have no covenant and no promise from God. We are outside of God's Grace, we are Gentiles as called by the Jews. Only the descendants of Adam are within the Covenant of God, but that was before. God is making a new thing, a new covenant. 

   How can we then partake of God's Grace and Covenant which were only given to the descendants of Adam? 

   This is the revelation of Maestro Eraño M. Evangelista. There is still hope for us. Did the revelation regarding the "offspring of men and of animals" wake you up?"

This is the equivalent of smoking spiritual crack and essentially coming up with absolute nonsense. THERE IS ONLY ONE CREATION!!! Honestly do I NEED to repeat myself on what I have said on Genesis 1 and 2,? Just read what I have written above.

OK, You might think I am harsh in my comment regarding spiritual crack, but take Erano's points to ANY theologian who knows the Bible, loves Jesus with his whole being, who has some scholarly knowledge etc. Erano would be LAUGHED out of theological colleges across the board. again, read Jeremiah 31 in context, As I have said before, the animals are not made part of the people or the covenant, it simply refers to the repopulation of the land with men and animals and the two Kingdoms of Israel become one. The offspring of men and animals are not some subset of creatures.

"Again, the prophecy...
At this I awoke and looked around. My sleep had been pleasant to me. 
"The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will plant the house 
of Israel and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and of animals.
Jeremiah 31:26-27 (NIV)
   This is the time for the people of the world to wake up from their deep sleep from the religions. 

   What kind of "people" are the "offspring of men and of animals?"
Just as I watched over them to uproot and tear down, and to overthrow, destroy and bring disaster, so I will watch over them to build and to plant," declares the LORD. 
Jeremiah 31:28 (NIV)
   These people are considered by God to be without a promise and without a covenant that is why He saves none. 

   Because we have not known the true God, we have suffered greatly through the times: wars, famines, disasters, plagues and others, but God is presently giving us a promise of a new beginning. All people will be united under the one true God. 

   What other teaching have we slept over with? 

   What teaching of God that we never knew because of the distortions of the religions?
"In those days people will no longer say, 
'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, 
and the children's teeth are set on edge.' 
Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever 
eats sour grapes - his own teeth will be set on edge. 
Jeremiah 31:29-30 (NIV)
   The doctrine of "original sin" is not true. It was only used by the Israelites then. The religions made us adhere to it, because they indoctrinated us. In fact it doesn't apply to us at all! We have now proven that the teachings of the religions are different from the teaching and commandments of God: everyman will pay for his own sin; no other man can save some other person’s life. He himself will have to save it. 

   You might ask: how?"

Christians do NOT use Jeremiah 31:29-30 as a proof text for original sin, it is not even a proof text against it or for it. Original Sin doesn't teach that man is not accountable to God, that is another strawman of what we Christians believe. Also Jeremiah had AWAKENED from a dream in the context of Jeremiah 31 and it's not referring to people thinking Christianity is wrong and turning to a prophet from the Philippines who fails the criteria of being a true prophet and again, the animals are not made part of the people or the covenant, it simply refers to the repopulation of the land with men and animals and the two Kingdoms of Israel become one. The offspring of men and animals are not some subset of creatures. Also in verses 28-29, rather than forsaking those people, YHWH is going to watch over them AND RESTORE THEM. The people being referred to in the context are the Israelites, not to the Gentiles, because scriptually the covenant was and has been made with the Jews and Jeremiah 31 in its entirety speaks not only of what Israel has had to go through but also it speaks on it's future restoration.

To all those who believe in Erano, especially those who have interacted with me in the past, Instead of saying "Oh that is YOUR interpretation, you are not the Prophet like Moses blah blah blah", Actually listen to what I say AND INTERACT with it. If you dismiss my understanding as incorrect simply because you think Erano is the prophet like Moses and I am not, that is circular reasoning and actually fails to address my point.

We shall continue the response to this particular article in the near future if the Lord Wills.

Answering Judaism.

Tuesday, 25 February 2014

An examination of "THE PROPHECY OF GOOD AGAINST EVIL": Expose of Maestro Erano M Evangelista 2

Next we come to the subject of the creation account of Genesis, let's continue shall we?

"The Story of Creation

Maestro Evangelista explains: the people of the world believed the teaching of the religions regarding the story of Creation, that Adam was the first created being. Let us read about the true "Story of Creation" as it is written in the Holy Bible (not from the teaching of the religions) that God has given to Maestro to reveal to the people of the world:

"The days are coming" - it will happen in time, the merging of two peoples, 

"the House of Judah & House of Israel" - these are the people who have been given the promise or covenant by God; who are the "offspring of men and of animals," are they creatures of God different from humans?"

Like I said in the previous article, the animals are not made part of the people or the covenant, it simply refers to the repopulation of the land with men and animals and the two Kingdoms of Israel become one. The offspring of men and animals are not some subset of creatures.

"Maestro Evangelista will explain it plainly; he tells us that God did have two creations. It would mean that the traditionally and accepted doctrine of the story of creation by the religions is not true? 

   Maestro says let us read the story of Creation:
So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and 
moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, 
and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 
Genesis 1:21 (NIV)
   God created the animals before man, true.
God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number 
and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth."
Genesis 1:22 (NIV)
   God only told them to multiply, there was no covenant given to them. 

   What day was it?
And there was evening, and there was morning - the fifth day.
Genesis 1:23 (NIV)
   What did God do next?"

No, there was one creation, The creation story has several things created but it's not harbouring two different creations. The contexts of both passages focus on certain details of the same creation account. This is something to expand upon later.

"The First Creation
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." 
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 
Genesis 1:26-27 (NIV)
"Let us make man in our image" - God created man - "male and female,” at the same time. In this context, "man" is to be understood in general - that is why it was written "male and female he created them" – of how many pairs were created, it was not mentioned. 

"God created man in his own image" – God is spirit, in what likeness are we created by Him? 

   But where was Adam? Maestro says Adam was not created yet.
God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; 
fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of 
the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." 
Genesis 1:28 (NIV)
"God blessed them” – them, more than one. 

"Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth" - They were only told to multiply, no covenant and no promise from God, same with the animals. 

"subdue it" - they were only reminded to subdue or to control the growth of their population, so that the land or the environment can sustain them."

Being created in God's image refers to us being rulers of the earth on God's behalf. Subduing the earth is not talking about controlling the population of animals or the human race, though there isn't anything wrong with keeping animals from going extinct and controlling their population and there is nothing wrong with keeping how many kids you have to a minimum, even if it is one kid. Subduing the earth refers to sowing and cultivation of the earth and using it as it should

"Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground." - to rule, meaning only to use the animals for the advancement of human knowledge, not to eat them. The theory of flight, we got them from the birds; the design of ships and submarine, we got it from the fish, and also we have developed many new technologies that were copied, in a way, from animals, only better. Even vaccines, before we use them on humans, are first tested on animals. 

   It is clear that men and animals were created as a same class - "of men and of animals” - in the eyes of God; no covenant and no commandments given to them. 

   This was the sixth day. 


   And on the seventh day, did God continue to create others things? 


   And the religions will say that God did not create anymore. 


   Maestro Evangelista says, let us read more for us to be certain, remember Adam and Eve were not yet created.
"

Both the chapters need to be read in context. Firstly, Men and Animals are NOT in the same class, much like how humans and angels are not in the same class, nor are men Gods. In the context, the subject of eating them doesn't come up in Chapter 1 because the fall had not yet occurred and man was pure. The intended diet for man was seed, fruit and vegetable in the garden, but the consumption of meat was only allowed by God after the fall, specifically in Genesis 9 and onwards.

We do have a right to eat animals because God allows us. We are not to eat however blood or other humans and even though cannibalism is not directly addressed in scripture, it is nevertheless forbidden considering God speaks only of consuming animals and condemns the bloodshed of a man, considering he was made in the image of God. Cannibalism is indeed out of the question and not an option for any human for these reasons alone.

And it's not the religions that claim God didn't create any more, it's the Bible's teaching, something which Erano can't get into his skull.

"The Seventh Day of Creation

   At this time, the population of the people created during the sixth day was growing.
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. 
By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; 
so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 
And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested 
from all the work of creating that he had done. 
This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created. 
When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens - 
Genesis 2:1 -4 (NIV)
   On the seventh day God rested from the work he had done, the time of the first creation had ended. 

“God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done” - He was the first to observe His own decree. That is why when you break the Sabbath, curse. 

   Maestro Eraño M. Evangelista says, the Gentile people came from these "of men and animals." We are part of the "first creation." If we really came from Adam and Eve, why then are there Blacks, Whites, Asians, and other colored people? We are all created equally by God! 

   Thus the Story of Creation ended. Again, you will ask: Where was Adam? When was he created?

   Adam was not yet created by God; the time of creation has ended. So the animals and humans created on the fifth and sixth days are considered by God as his "first creation" - "of men and of animals.""

Regarding the issue of the Sabbath, I address this issue here: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/observance-of-torah-demanded-of-gentiles.html

There is no evidence from the book of Genesis that from the time of Adam to the time of Joseph that Sabbath observance was commanded of the human race, It was a later commandment given to Moses on Mt Sinai.

I am not going to go into details about what colour Adam and Eve had, but the existence of Blacks, Whites, Asians and many diverse colours of the human race did not occur until the building of the Tower of Babel. I presume that the race colour developed after that evident, it doesn't give details in that regard, nor do we need to know. There is NO claim that one set of humans is superior over another, no Christian claims that.

If you want to see how Erano abuses Genesis 1 and 2, we shall definitely see how he does.

Creation Accounts
If one claims he is a prophet like Moses and yet has the exegesis that makes Ahmed Deedat or Zakir Naik absolute scholars, then something is seriously wrong here and we are going to see this throughout this next section.

One thing I will explain is that Genesis 1 and 2 speak on the same creation event, not two different events all together. They compliment one another and one has details that the other doesn't have, without further delay, let us carry on.

"The Second Creation

But God again made a special creation:
and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no 
plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not 
sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground, 
Genesis 2:5 (NIV)
"on the earth" - the place somewhere in the Middle East, the desert, it describes the absence of tree and plants. Does this bareness pertain to the state of the whole world then? Maestro says no, because the plants were already created during the time of Creation. Is it true? 

   Let us read in:
Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:11-12 (NIV)
   God created the plants and the trees to be food for the animals. You will see God's great design, how will the animals survive if there were no plants for them to feed on? 

   When was that?
And there was evening, and there was morning - the third day.
Genesis 1:13 (NIV)
   If God created first the animals and men, without creating plants and seed bearing fruits for food, they will not live or survive. 

   Let us return to:
and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the 
field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth 
and there was no man to work the ground, 
Genesis 2:5 (NIV)
"on the earth" - the place in the Middle East, the desert. This bareness only describes the state of the land in the Middle East.

"no man to work the ground" - there is not yet an intelligent man to cultivate and plant the fields. The people of the first creation, though they are already multiplying, they were still food gatherers, they just pick the food they eat from the bushes and from the ground.

but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- 
Genesis 2:6 (NIV)
   God made water flow through the land to make it sustainable – irrigation and technology is being introduced and what happened next?
the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed 
into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. 
Genesis 2:7 (NIV)
"formed the man from the dust of the ground" - You will notice that God is creating again, the 
creation of a man after the Seventh Day – the man was created alone, without a pair. He was a special creation of God, the second creation. 

What Chapter 1 speaks about in it's content is WHEN the human race was first created, Chapter 2 speaks on HOW he was created, it is the same event told but giving details in a given context. No question it may refer to a particular part of the earth where it has not rained, that is certainly not disputable.

Also, Look at Genesis 1 carefully:
"11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.

20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so."

Man is included in ONE creation, not two. When Jews and Christians study the Bible, It is obviously referring to THE CREATION STORY, NOT THE CREATIONS STORY. There isn't a man who was not intelligent enough to cultivate, the context is simply speaking of what God allowed man to eat and what he would be able to cultivate and harvest from, namely a shrub or other plants. In Genesis 2, it is speaking of a particular field that hadn't had a man put there, because he had not been created as of yet. Yes I know Man was told to be fruitful an multiply but in Genesis 2, it tells us HOW he was put there to be fruitful and multiply to begin with.

"2 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array.

2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

Adam and Eve

4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.

5 Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth[a] and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, 6 but streams[b] came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. 7 Then the Lord God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil."

This section tells you what God did on the 6th day, and it is clear in the context that after he created man, that was the END of his creation, full stop.

   "How special was the "man?"
Now the LORD God had planted a garden in the east, 
in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 
Genesis 2:8 (NIV)
   This is the time the man was put in the Garden; the garden existed before the "man" - the second creation:
And the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground - trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 
Genesis 2:9 (NIV)
"the LORD God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground" - this was another of God's special creations, what kind? 

"trees that were pleasing to the eye" - these are ornamental trees 

"good for food" - the fruit bearing trees. 

"tree of life" and "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" - meaning when the man was placed in the Garden he alone had some kind of knowledge and intelligence which sets him apart from the people of the "first creation." He can distinguish what is beneficial and what is not. 

Where again is he getting this nonsense of the "first creation people" and "second creation people" from? Oh wait, he is gaining it from his vain imagination, oh silly me. While you can speak of creations collectively as one creation, this wouldn't prove the point of Erano in the first place and it's simply a ridiculous assertion on his part. Other than that there isn't much to say. However I will post a video by Chris Gatreau (fivepointbaptist on YouTube) which may interest you guys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2fJxpdS148

   How rich was the land prepared for that man?
A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters. The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.) The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush. The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Asshur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. 
Genesis 2:10-14 (NIV)
   Meaning, the garden was bountiful and full of resources.

"A river watering the garden flowed from Eden" - the garden have a system of canals, an irrigation system. 

"The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there" - that the Garden was abundant with natural resources. It is only intended for the man in the Garden.
The LORD God took the man and put him in 
the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 
Genesis 2:15 (NIV)
   The man was placed in the garden, and had been given all that he would need and to maintain it and cultivate it. 

Surprisingly, there is something good he has said here, A garden with plenty to use, plenty to touch, smell, taste and hear. No doubt very beautiful. However his next point is ridiculous.

   This is a different "creation" from the first 7 days. The religions never taught or even knew about these two creations in the Holy Bible. 

   Since the people of the world also do not know of this true teaching, they believed in the story of religions – that Adam and Eve were the first to be created by God. That is why there had been much confusion and misunderstandings among the religions and its believers due to the inadequate explanations given with regard to the Holy Bible. 

   But with the coming of Maestro Eraño M. Evangelista and the teaching he reveals in the Holy Bible, the people of the world can now test or verify the teachings of the religions - whether they are true or not. They only need to ask him regarding the true teaching of God in the Holy Bible. 

   If a teaching given by a preacher is not written in the Holy Bible, people should not believe it; especially if he says he had done research on the subject about God. It is blasphemy to God. How can you make a research about God? As if you are subjecting Him for evaluation and searching for background information! 

   Maestro Evangelista says, God reveals Himself to His servants, the Prophets; people should go and find the true prophet in our time and hear what he has to say about God and of His teaching. 

   Let us continue..."

Again, and I know I am repeating this point, they are not two creations. Adam and Eve WERE the first created by God in the Bible, Erano has NO EVIDENCE OTHERWISE, only claims of prophetic revelation as reliable as Ergun Caner's knowledge of Islam (Which is poor by the way and the man lies through his teeth to let you know). Also, Just because this guy claims to be a prophet, that doesn't mean he cannot be held to account by the Bible. The "Touch not God's anointed" abuse isn't going to work here.

Research is perfectly acceptable in religious studies, man has been given a mind and should use it to come to a knowledge of the truth. YHWH did not give man a brain, just so they could willingly leave their intellect, discernment and evaluation at the door. There is nothing wrong about researching God. Seek him and you will find him.

It is clear that when we actually exegete the Bible and look at the prophets and what they and the apostles have said, it is clear Erano's teaching crumbles, when one simply uses his mind, reads the context and let's the Spirit guide him through the scripture.

More arguments shall be addressed in another article.

Answering Judaism.

An examination of "THE PROPHECY OF GOOD AGAINST EVIL": Expose of Maestro Erano M Evangelista

Here is another article taking a look at some more claims uttered by false prophet extraordinare Maestro Erano M Evangelista.

The identity of the serpent as Christians already know refers to Satan in the context of the book of Genesis, specifically in Genesis 3:15 where it speaks of the serpent's head being bruised and that is a given point raised and Revelation 12:9 does speak of Satan. Let's deal with the first statement:

"The religions considered this prophecy to be the struggle between God and the snake (Satan). Reading the prophecy again, it is the struggle between the offspring of the woman against the offspring of the snake.

This is what Maestro Evangelista has been saying: If the god whom the religions are preaching, is still struggling with Satan: what kind of a god is he? A weak god who has an opponent and still struggling? 

But that is not the God that is written in the Holy Bible."

No one in Christianity disputes that the struggle is between the offspring of the woman, but it is wrong to assert that Satan has literal offspring, but maybe that isn't the point Erano is making. He does't make sense anyway.

Just because Satan is being allowed to roam the earth, this doesn't mean "the religions" try to preach that God is weak, that is a lie. God can and does allow Satan to tempt human beings but only if he so wills, Satan CANNOT touch a person who believes without God giving him permission.

The next part of who the offspring is that Erano tries to establish that he and only he knows who they are. Let's look a Jeremiah 31:26 which he misquotes:

"23 This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: “When I bring them back from captivity,[c] the people in the land of Judah and in its towns will once again use these words: ‘The Lord bless you, you prosperous city, you sacred mountain.’ 24 People will live together in Judah and all its towns—farmers and those who move about with their flocks. 25 I will refresh the weary and satisfy the faint.”

26 At this I awoke and looked around. My sleep had been pleasant to me."

Jeremiah is awakening from a dream he had received from YHWH, he is NOT talking about the religions, namely Judaism and Christianity putting the world into a deep spiritual coma.

The Offspring of Men and Animals
Here we see another twisting of the context the Bible and all the while abusing the idea of receiving revelation from God directly just to try and make himself look like a credible exegete.

Let's look at his points:

""The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will plant the house of 
Israel and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and of animals.
Jeremiah 31:27 (NIV)
"The days are coming" - this is still to happen. 

The two Houses will be merged with the "offspring of men and of animals" - This is the great prophecy of God. 

What is the meaning of this prophecy?"

"The Two Creations in the Holy Bible. 

Who are the offspring of men and of animals that will be merged with the two houses? Ask the religions; they cannot give you an answer. 

Maestro Eraño M. Evangelista says: the meaning of this prophecy is now being revealed for the first time to the whole world so that all the people may know that there is one true God and the religions don't know Him and all of His prophecies. 

When shall we truly be awaken from our long slumber with the religions? 

Why is it called "offspring of men and of animals"?
Just as I watched over them to uproot and tear down, and to overthrow, destroy and bring disaster, so I will watch over them to build and to plant," declares the LORD. 
Jeremiah 31:28 (NIV)
   The "offspring of men and of animals" and the two houses, God will make them one people. 

Let's establish what Jeremiah 31 actually teaches in context. If you read the entire passage, it pertains to the future restoration of Israel in light of the fact that their nation has nearly been brought to ruin as a result of their idolatry and sins, which have angered YHWH to no end. What Jeremiah pertains to in verse 27 is a repopulation of the land of Israel, that is what is actually being referred to in the context, Even Jamieson Fausset-Brown's commentary has shed some light on this which I think is a valid conclusion:
"27. He shows how a land so depopulated shall again be peopled. God will cause both men and beasts in it to increase to a multitude (Eze 36:9-11; Ho 2:23)."

Of course Erano scoffs at scholars and theologians and his followers cannot give a response and only repeat their same errors rather than offer a rebuttal and simply dismiss me and others just because we are not the prophet like Moses. Circular Reasoning at it's best.

It is also arrogant for him to claim that "the religions cannot give you an answer", as if anything he says if biblically substantiated.

For that matter, the animals are not made part of the people or the covenant, it simply refers to the repopulation of the land with men and animals and the two Kingdoms of Israel become one.

   What shall be also revealed to us?
"In those days people will no longer say, 
'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, 
and the children's teeth are set on edge.' 
Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever eats sour grapes – 
his own teeth will be set on edge. 
Jeremiah 31:29-30 (NIV)
"In those days" - On the day when the "offspring of men and of animals" are merged with the two houses, we will know that the teaching of the "original sin" by the religions is not true. That everyone is responsible for his own sin and we will no longer believe the teachings of the religions that Jesus died for our sins! If Jesus died, he died for his own sin! 

   It will happen when we have identified the "offspring of men and of animals." 

    When we believed in the religions, we came under a deep sleep because of the sweetness of their teachings, without realizing in the Holy Bible that God has already defined what is good for us and what is not. That is why we continue to experience the "curses" up to this day. 

   Maestro Evangelista says, we can't say to everyone that they have been deceived by the religions. All of us, including Maestro, were before under the control of the religions. The time has come for us to wake up and get out of the religions so we can find out the truth: that we can have salvation in God and not in religions. 

If this man receives revelation from God, then he should be able to have God reveal what original sin actually teaches.

Original sin teaches man is spiritually dead in sin as a result of Adam and Eve's fall. It doesn't teach that man is not responsible for his actions. Despite their spiritual deadness, man is still held responsible for what they do and God will hold them to account for their evil deeds. They also need Jesus to awaken them from being spiritually dead and need to be made spiritually alive. So what we have from Erano is a strawman of what Christians teach and thus he doesn't actually address our doctrine.

Jesus again did not die for his own sin, he died for ours. Christians DON'T DENY THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR SIN. Jesus, though he died for us, holds us to account for sinning against him and the other members of the Trinity. If there isn't responsibility for our sins, there is no judgement for sin.

   This is what Maestro Eraño M. Evangelista is doing for the people of the world, to wake them up! 

   How? 

   Maestro Evangelista will show us what it means to be awakened:
"The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will plant the house of 
Israel and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and of animals.
Jeremiah 31:27 (NIV)
   For the first time, the teaching of the religions will be shaken and uprooted from their very foundation! 

   Who are the "offspring of men and of animals?" Maestro Evangelista will reveal it all to us: "

We'll see who actually is wrong and rather than actually awaken people, Erano actually put's people dab smack into a spiritual coma. It doesn't surprise me considering in my opinion, he robs his followers of not only discernment, but intellectualism as well. If you leave your brain out of the door for the sake of a supposed prophet, you are out of your mind. Although Yisroel Blumenthal and I have our disagreements on who Jesus is and who the Messiah is, he has often made the point that God is not afraid of you asking him questions. Ask yourself, Is Erano really worth following to your death?

Also I have already pointed out what the subject of offspring of men and of animals actually means so I needn't go into detail on that again.

I shall address more points in his article, but not in this article, considering there is some information that need's to be covered in depth.

Answering Judaism.