Friday, March 16, 2012

Harbinger: A totally unfair criticism from someone who hasn't read it.

Oh brother, just listened to the Brannon Howse March 9th radio broadcast in which he asks Jimmy DeYoung what he thinks of Jonathan Cahn's Harbinger, who completely trashes the book although he says he hasn't read it himself. Moral of the story: READ IT YOURSELF BRANNON!! Or listen to Cahn's talks and interviews. There are some up at YouTube.

I had a feeling that making a novel out of that material was a big big mistake but nevertheless the book does stick to the overall revelation that Cahn gave in his various talks and does not deserve to be accused of "manipulating" the reader. The information, the correspondence between Isaiah 9:10 and events following 9/11 is uncanny and honestly presented, and Cahn is NOT making himself out to be a prophet in this, he is simply reporting on the correspondences he observed between the two events, and DeYoung MISREPRESENTED THOSE CORRESPONDENCES.

I think DeYoung's review is utterly irresponsible. He completely mischaracterizes what Cahn is doing. The idea that this Messianic pastor is pushing "replacement theology" is for starters some kind of huge misreading. All he said was that America was the only other nation that was dedicated to God as was Israel, and he pointed out the dedications that were made of America to God, which is indisputable as far as I can see. And it ought to be said that we don't need to refer to those instances of consecration for the harbingers of Isaiah 9:10 to be echoed in 9/11, it's just that it helps explain why God is going to such lengths to warn us. But in any case, Cahn said nothing to suggest America REPLACED Israel.

Then DeYoung didn't know that rebuilding actually has begun at Ground Zero although that has nothing to do with the revelation anyway. It's about the INTENT to rebuild which was clearly STATED by both Israel and America -- it's that ATTITUDE that is the main correspondence between the two, which is a statement of defiance of God after God sent judgment on both. DeYoung claims he took it out of context. He did not. The context was God's judgment in both cases and the nation's defiance in response.

Also nobody claimed America is rebuilding with hewn stone, nor that groves of sycamores were cut down that were replaced by groves of cedars yet DeYoung claims that's what was said. It was not. The reference is first to a symbolic hewn stone brought in to be the cornerstone of the new Freedom Tower; second to a highly symnbolic sycamore tree on the property of Ground Zero that was felled in the event, and third, to a highly symbolic tree of the same basic type of the cedar (which has more similarities in Hebrew but to my mind is similar enough in English) that was put in its place. There was even a symbolic brick entangled in the roots of the felled sycamore tree, though there were also news reports of the wreckage of the twin towers as fallen bricks. The correspondences are symbolic and very telling, things that only God Himself could have brought about.

I hope Brannon Howse soon corrects this horrific misrepresentation.


Mary said...

Excellent post on Howse and DeYoung's irresponsible comments on Harbinger. For Pete's sake guys, read the book. I wouldn't think of reviewing a book I have not read, no matter how grievous doctrinally. Thanks.

Gatekeeper96740 said...

I agree and Howes has done this many times.He trashes someone without doing the research himself.I had a long drawn out discussion on another website about this same topic.
Howse is quick to fire the heretic gun at someone.I not only read the book but looked into the source materials.Stunning to say the least.
Did either of them do that?
No replacement theology.Done.
I sometime thing the left isn't our worst enemy other Christians are.

Faith said...

MOST people who actually read Cahn's study end up having to acknowledge its uncanny accuracy. A very few seem to have a mental disorder about it or just haven't spent the time to understand it. Where are you finding objectors to it?

To be fair, it wasn't Brannon Howse who trashed the book, it was his guest and I think he may simply have trusted him too far. I wrote him a note about it and I'm hoping he'll research it himself. The guest also hadn't really read it. Maybe they'll both take some time with it now and change their opinion.

I usually find Howse to be trustworthy at identifying heresy, but he does have to READ the stuff.

I agree, it's really distressing that there are so many Christians who are falling away these days. But Howse is usually good at making the right distinctions.

Thanks for your comment!