Monday, July 30, 2012

The Harbinger wars continue

Inevitable I suppose that Howse and DeYoung would answer Joseph Farah. I'm going to agree with them this far, that personal speculations ought to be kept out of such discussions, meaning Farah's speculations about pride and envy as the motivation for Howse and DeYoung's criticisms of The Harbinger, keeping to the theological contentions instead.

Right off the bat Jimmy De Young brings up what is still their central objection to the Harbinger, that
Cahn's fundamental error... is his hermeneutic.
He is quoting from an email sent to his associate David James by Dallas Theological Seminary professor Dr. Roy Zuck, affirming James' criticism which is soon to come out as a book. The email continues, explaining what Dr. Zuck considers to be wrong with Cahn's hermeneutic:
Isaiah 9:10 has nothing to do with the United States. Verses 8 to 11 are all addressed to israel. Having taught hermeneutics for years at Dallas Theological Seminary and havinh written a textook on the subject, I'm greatly bothered to see people like Cahn take a passage totally out of context. These verses don't even apply to the United States. [7:00-8:00]
De Young goes on to say that neither Joseph Farah nor Jonathan Cahn have dealt with this hermeneutical issue, which he and Brannon Howse have been questioning. As a matter of fact Cahn has addressed this allegation about his supposedly faulty hermeneutics many times, and covers it pretty thoroughly in his Response to David James:
D. James claims that The Harbinger departs from a biblical hermeneutic in that Isaiah 9:10 in context concerns Israel, not America. This claim, that he brings up several times in his critique, is based on an underlying confusion – specifically, that the book is claiming that Isaiah 9:10 is a prophecy about America. The problem is The Harbinger does no such thing. It does speak of a connection between America and Israel (not exactly a novel idea) and it does speak of a mystery from the Scriptures which has an amazing application to America. But this is light years removed from claiming that a certain Scripture is prophesying of America.

...Further, the reappearance of such ancient patterns of judgment revealed in a particular Scripture does not in any way affect the original understanding, meaning, or interpretation of that Scripture in its original context - not in any way, shape, or form..

...Further, the book includes quotes from the most respected and classical of Bible commentaries. In The Harbinger, the hermeneutic of Isaiah 9:10 is not taken one inch away from its historical and contextual bearings, nor from its original, proper, and traditionally understood meaning – not an inch, not a millimeter. The critique is groundless – based on an apparent inability to distinguish the realm of Scriptural interpretation from that of Scriptural application. The Harbinger’s hermeneutics remain absolutely sound.
[my bolding]
It's been answered again and again: The Harbinger does NOT see America somehow buried in Isaiah 9:10. The Harbinger does nothing more than recognize that God has applied Isaiah 9:10 TO America, as He so often applies His word to us as we read it. In this case He applied it in a way that could make your hair stand on end, but nevertheless it's nothing more than the usual application of scripture outside its original context. The original context REMAINS the original context, God merely making use of it for another purpose, which is STANDARD EVERYDAY BIBLE HERMENEUTICS THAT EVERY BELIEVER EXERCISES WHENEVER WE READ THE BIBLE.

Howse and DeYoung go on to address some side issues that Joseph Farah brought up about DeYoung's end times theology. I've posted on the one allegation Farah mentions that I consider to be a serious error on DeYoung's part, the belief that it's possible to take the Mark of the Beast and then change your mind, but otherwise his dispensational theology isn't the issue in these discussions about The Harbinger. No doubt it explains something about how the criticisms of the book are arrived at, since most of the critics are dispensationalists, but then so are some of the book's defenders.

So I don't want to get more into that part of the discussion because it's mostly highlighting the differences between the theologies of DeYoung and Farah and gets away from the criticism of The Harbinger, but I do have to say it was very funny when De Young finished his lengthy exposition of his own dispensationalist pretrib theology by saying [27:28]
So that is biblical information. I gave no opinion, I gave no interpretation, I simply kept a view to the locations in God's word...
And it's quite true that all he did was refer to various verses of scripture and explain them, but he both chose the verses and explained them completely from within his own interpretive scheme as if there were no other possible way of understanding them, and that IS interpreting them. It was nothing BUT interpretation.

But again, that's a side issue. Then they go on to the issue of Cahn's being interviewed by Glenn Beck, and unfortunately I haven't heard that interview so I can't comment on it. The accusation that Cahn in any way gave the impression that he agrees with Beck's religious views hasn't been demonstrated, but I can't judge it. The idea is that it's OK to appear on a purely secular program because there isn't going to be a religious conflict, but I have to say that by their own standards Brannon's appearing on O'Reilly could be criticized in the same way appearing on Beck could be, since O'Reilly is a Catholic and why wouldn't it look like Brannon was endorsing Catholicism by that appearance? The Catholic God is not the same as the true God either; he's either the Pope or Mary or the wafer since all receive the worship due to God alone.

Then -- glory be! -- It turns out Brannon has finally read the book, or is reading it, so now he brings out some more "concerns" he has based on his reading.

On page 54 [39:47 on the audio counter] he takes issue with The Prophet's asking "Is God not able to speak through such things [meaning a Bible commentary]?" To which Brannon declares, "Dr. DeYoung, the commentaries are not inspired!" Dear Brannon: NEITHER WAS BALAAM'S ASS! Or was she, perhaps, at the moment she spoke? Meaning, God is certainly ABLE to speak through a commentary OR an ass. This is not the same thing as saying that either the commentary or the ass is inspired. Do you really think Cahn is teaching that commentaries are inspired? Do you really think any reader out there is going to get that message from that bit of dialogue? In any case all he means is that a commentary can bring out the true meaning of the scripture, he really doesn't mean any more than that. As usual Brannon and Company are oh so fastidiously straining out gnats.

But it gets worse. It gets positively blockheaded, pun more or less intended as the next complaint is from page 68 [40:00] about the Israelis' vow to rebuild their fallen buildings with hewn stone. "I don't believe that any of the towers that are being rebuilt are being rebuilt with hewn stone, are they, Dr. DeYoung?" No, me bonny lad, they're being built with steel and etc.

Isaiah 9:10 is about the INTENTION of the nation of Israel to rebuild. The intention is what reveals the spirit of defiance as they don't plan to seek God about it, aren't feeling chastened by God's judgment through the Assyrian attack, and aren't anywhere near a repentant spirit. The INTENTION is the point, not the rebuilding itself, and that intention WAS echoed after 9/11 as a twenty-ton block of hewn or quarried stone was brought in to be the cornerstone of the new Freedom Tower. Words of defiance meant to express patriotic zeal were spoken over that stone, too, rather than brokenheartedness for the sins that brought about the calamity of 9/11, rather than a call to repentance. And then it turned out they weren't going to use that stone after all so they took it away. Which it seems to me gives the whole thing even MORE of a connection with Isaiah 9:10. God had to have a hewn stone in there whether it was needed or not, so we couldn't miss his clear message that America was defiant of His judgments in exactly the same way Israel was.

Brannon, Dr. DeYoung, with all due respect, maybe, you guys are missing it completely.

Then he takes on the sycamore tree on page 83 [40:45]. "It's a TOTALLY DIFFERENT TREE!" Well, uh, yeah, but they are BOTH called "sycamores" and the American version was named after the Middle Eastern version. Isn't that kind of maybe just a little bit uncanny right there? I mean, the Middle Eastern version simply doesn't grow in America but a tree called a "sycamore" certainly fills the Isaiah 9:10 bill wouldn't you say, considering that God is using it to speak to America and it works beautifully to draw the parallel with Isaiah 9:10? I mean why do we need a lesson in botany to make that connection? It's a "sycamore," the ones in Isaiah 9:10 are "sycamores." They even look similar, growing quite tall with widely spreading branches. How hard do you have to work at missing this simple point anyway?

And of course it's even worse when we get to the "cedars" that in Isaiah 9:10 are the Israelis' choice to replace the downed sycamores. At Ground Zero the sycamore was replaced by a ...a ...a SPRUCE! Hey, that's not a cedar! DeYoung says if it's really from God "it will be fulfilled in absolute detail, not a variance here or there" and Howse adds that Cahn is "stretching things." But this is, as Jonathan Cahn wrote, quoted above, to confuse the exegesis of the passage as it was written to Israel with the application of the passage to the current situation in America. We don't expect such exactness in application, how could we? They seem to be going out of their way to avoid the obvious similarity, which can be simply seen with your own two eyes: conifer trees with needles and cones. And if you do get into botany you'll find that they even belong to the same family, in Hebrew the erez, in Latin the pinaceas or the pine type trees, which include pines, firs, cedars and spruces. Imagine that! Why didn't they replace the sycamore with another sycamore or an oak or some other leafy type tree that grows in that part of the country? Why such a DIFFERENT type tree? Clearly ONLY because it is the same type of tree that was used to replace Israel's sycamores, and who could have made that choice but God Himself?

Really, this should not take all this explanation. The average reader gets it right away, it's the whole point of the book that these harbingers, as Cahn calls them, are such unavoidable pointers back to Isaiah 9:10, which is what God wants us to notice --the attitude of defiance we had about 9/11, the lack of contrition for our sins, the lack of repentance, which was the same attitude described there of Israel. They all point back to Isaiah 9:10. We had the same spirit and God is putting up signposts to to emphasize it by planting all these harbingers, the fallen bricks, the hewn stone, the sycamore, the pine type tree to replace it, all the elements of 9:10. So we'll see that we deserve God's judgment just as Israel did, and that if we don't repent and change our ways we may expect a more devastating judgment just as God brought against ancient Israel. No, He probably won't scatter us throughout the Middle East as He did Israel. Sigh. Really, guys, you do have to be a bit dense to miss this. Or afflicted with some kind of theologically induced myopia. Can't see the forest for ...

Well, I guess at least they did finally address the harbingers themselves. And of course there is no illusion here at all, the harbingers are as uncannily eerily something only God could have brought about as we simple people knew they were from the beginning. The harbingers are the message, all the rest of it is packaging!

There's more but I've got to stop so I'm going to put this much up for now.

Oh brother, and David James' book is going to come out soon and repeat this same kind of nonsense!

Saturday, July 28, 2012

Musings off the London Olympics: is there any hope God would yet turn us back to Him?

I didn't get to see the opening ceremony for the London Olympics, but saw a few pictures, read a few descriptions, and if there's a video out there of the whole thing I suppose I might eventually see more. I watched the wedding of William and Kate. I'm an Anglophile, partly no doubt because my paternal great grandfather was a lithographer in London, and my mother's family were mostly English as well, but maybe more because I know a little about England's history.

The wedding of over a year ago now was full of Christian references because of England's Christian history, although it's sadly clear they've lost their Christian worldview and the Christian rituals have become for the most part empty forms. The Archbishop of Canterbury is either a liberal or a Romanist or both.

I wouldn't expect their Christian past to show up in the Olympics ceremony and I'm sure it didn't, and besides, the whole Olympics thing has a pagan origin.

I know I'm a "fanatic" to many, even to some other Christians. I think it's the only thing to be if you're truly a Christian. To be honest, I don't think I'm enough of a fanatic really, I have all the symptoms of the worldliness of most Christians these days. At least I regret them.

So I see the Queen of England at the Olympics opening, not looking very happy in her photos for some reason, don't know why, usually she's smiling in her pictures. She's supposedly the "head of the Church" of England. I wonder what that means in reality, what she really believes, what with all the liberal influences in the Church of England over the last century or so.

Mitt Romney attracted some negative attention by the British press while he was there, and a snarky put-down by the Mayor of London, for some remarks Romney made about what he saw as an apparent ("disconcerting") lack of preparedness for the Olympics. I'm no particular fan of Romney, but as the frontrunning Republican candidate for President against Obama he represents America and I found myself resenting the London mayor's nastiness. Romney did run the Olympics in Utah after all, and if the task was in any way less demanding because of its location than running them in a busy city like London, one ought to expect that those who are used to running things in that city should be able to demonstrate their ability to do as well there as Romney did in Utah. In any case he should be treated with some respect for that experience. But I was also disappointed in the mayor because such snarkiness against a foreign leader is just not in the spirit I associate with England. Grace and charity are what I expect in such a situation, humility, grace and charity, not rudeness. Sure, perhaps Romney should have said nothing, but it wasn't anywhere near the rudeness of the mayor. And I'm also disappointed in Romney for changing course in response to the rudeness and saying only nice things about the London preparedness after that.

So goodbye to England's illustrious past in more ways than one. Not that its degeneration is new, it's been on its way down for decades. Too bad. England was once great. BECAUSE IT WAS CHRISTIAN. Because of its great Christian preachers, leaders, and general culture. That's the ONLY reason it was great. When it began to lose its Christian foundations it started to fall from grace. Now it's undergoing God's judgment just as America is, just as Europe is. Being overrun with Muslims is certainly God's judgment. Being attacked by terrorists is certainly God's judgment.

I don't know if The Harbinger will have much of an impact on America or not in the end but I have to believe God has sent it to us as an unavoidable proof of His displeasure with us, and a warning that if we don't turn back His judgments against us are only going to escalate. He brought down ancient Israel and they never recovered, and Isaiah 9:10 was certainly a marker or harbinger of their doom. He can do that to us as well. The harbingers the book reports on spell out our doom in an unusually literal way, as clear signs of God's speaking to America through the appearance in America of some Old Testament signs and principles, starting with Isaiah 9:10 (or Isaiah 9:8-14 to get the whole context). If we don't heed them and turn back, they will stand as testimony against the nation until it is destroyed.

Maybe God has given similar signs to England or Europe but nobody noticed them. It's possible, I suppose, though perhaps not very likely. He'd also have to give someone to notice them and bring them to the attention of the public, as He did with Jonathan Cahn.

America was once great because of our adherence to the God of the Bible and the predominantly Christian mindset of Americans. The same was once true of England, and particularly after the Reformation much of Europe. I've been for some time in a state of mourning over the great loss in both cases. America was once GOOD. Is there any of that goodness left in us after our murder of millions of our unborn, our "sexual revolution" that has violated everything related to sex that God spells out in His Word as the Law that brings blessing if obeyed, cursing if disobeyed; the great apostasy of the churches, the liberalism that gobbled up so many of them, the cults that sprang up in the 19th century (Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science), the increase in militant atheism and ridicule of God and religion?

There are those who are sure God won't send us a revival at this late stage in the history of the world. There are certainly reasons to think this could be the case, especially the apostasy itself which a revival would have to correct to be a true revival, but which could just swallow it up instead. Perhaps it's a new Reformation we really need. Mormonism is not Christianity but they want a revival. Catholicism is not Christianity but they'd certainly like to see a revival of Catholicism. Muslims want to see Islam spread. The New Agers even have their own notions that some kind of "revival" is coming, some kind of great evolutionary leap from what they see as the retrograde influence of Christianity into some wonderful new world of peace and light. Kind of what the UN envisions as well.

Christians know all this could only be the ascendancy of the spirit of Antichrist, ultimately over the whole world, and not true revival, and this is certainly what COULD happen instead of true revival at this stage in history. It would fit prophecy of course. Well, God knows, God is in charge. I still hope true revival might come and wake up what's left of the true Church and turn the hearts of the apostates to the true God. In America, in England, in Europe, where God first laid down the principles of His word through the New Testament and brought civilization where there had been nothing but the darkness of paganism and witchcraft. To which we're all now reverting if He doesn't intervene.

Friday, July 27, 2012

Defending the Second Amendment

I put this up at my other blog, Too Late for America, linking to Chris Pinto's radio show today that quotes from many of America's early leaders on the meaning of the Second Amendment, then decided it needed to be mentioned here as well because of the threat from the UN that could take away the guns of American citizens.

Chris Pinto takes us back to the founding generation of America and shows the original intent of the Second Amendment, which was the right, and the obligation, of ALL the citizens to be armed for protection of the nation, for self-protection and against every kind of tyranny. Tyranny which of course the UN represents.

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Jonathan Cahn radio interview

A good interview with Jonathan Cahn by Dr. Larry Spargimino on South West Ministries Radio, two days, yesterday and today:
Wednesday July 25 program
Thursday July 26 program

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Joseph Farah on some of The Harbinger critics

Joseph Farah of World Net Daily has an article today taking to task some of the critics of The Harbinger, specifically Brannon Howse and Jimmy DeYoung. Glad to see it.

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Did Jan Hus hear personally from God? Prophecy, Discernment, spiritual gifts etc.

Was recently watching Chris Pinto's film A Lamp in the Dark again, and noted that Jan Huss, one of the pre-Reformation Reformers, burned at the stake for his commitment to the Bible as the ultimate authority for a believer,* claimed to have had a private revelation from God that sounds to me like it should be called a prophecy. Wondered how that sits with all those Protestants out there who deny that such things have occurred since New Testament times. Jan Huss is one of our heroes, after all, originally a Catholic Priest, as were most of the Reformers, who saw that the Bible contradicted the teachings of Rome. He became a recognized leader in the movement that finally deposed Rome from its dominance of Europe and established the word of God as the "light unto the path" of the believer.

So here's the prophecy: In the film the narrator says:

Before he died he claimed that God had given him a promise. The name "Hus" means "goose" in the Czech language and so the Lord had told him:
They will silence the goose, but in one hundred years I will raise a swan from your ashes that no one will be able to silence. [Source: Jan Hus: The Goose of Bohemia, by William P. Farley --about 32:38 into the film]
So, all you cessationists out there: Do you deny that this was a special revelation, even a prophecy, given to Jan Hus personally by God?

He was prophesying of course of Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation which God would bring to Europe a hundred years after Hus's time. One might wonder if calling Luther a "swan" reflects God's sense of humor of course (or if a swan has characteristics that do fit Luther that I'm not aware of.) The Popes don't say much that I agree with but the Pope who referred to Luther as a "wild boar" got it right in my estimation. You could say that we needed a wild boar at the time of course. But anyway, as far as the Reformation goes Luther could be regarded as the beautiful swan that brought it all to fruition.

I haven't particularly thought of what I do with my blogs as a "discernment ministry" but maybe I should, as that does happen to be a big part of it. I have prayed for discernment many times, and in my experience God answers that sort of prayer -- prayers for understanding, prayers for wisdom -- much more readily than other kinds of prayers (such as for healing of my extremely painful bone-on-bone arthritis of the hips.) No, I'm certainly not claiming that my prayers guarantee I'm going to be right in my judgments, of course not, only that I have many times found myself understanding something after prayer that before had been confusing and I thank God for that. Happening to watch this film again and happening to notice that quote from Hus is very likely God's answering a prayer for understanding about the gifts for today although I don't remember a specific recent prayer about this.

I just got another comment on my "Heaven" blog, certainly a discernment issue and the one topic that really brings them in -- most to denounce me for daring to suggest that the heaven experiences are counterfeits.

They often fault me for not having read the books, but they also never succeed in showing that what I've learned from other sources about the books is false. In most cases of course a reviewer should read the book or see the movie or whatever, but there really are cases where that is not necessary, where the public knowledge of their content is sufficient to make a judgment. Remember The Last Temptation of Christ? There was no need to see the movie if your concern was Bible truth because its main story line was well known and clearly in contradiction with the Bible. Same with the DaVinci Code. On the other hand, the book The Harbinger needs to be read because there are many different ideas floating around about what it says and many misunderstandings out there to mislead people about it.

So, you could say that whether or not you always need firsthand knowledge in order to render a judgment is also a matter of discernment.

Discernment implies careful sorting of truth from lies or deception, in the light of the Holy Spirit of course. Discernment is needed first of all in reading the Bible or "rightly dividing" the Word of Truth.

If you believe that God's supernatural gifting of the Church stopped after New Testament times then you'll automatically understand all claims to supernatural experiences today to be false. No discernment is required. But if you believe otherwise then rightly judging a particular case requires you to spend time carefully comparing the Biblical standard with the claim to supernatural experience.

Does the quote from Jan Hus prove anything or not?

Follow-up thought: It could be argued that cessationist doctrine itself, the doctrine that all supernatural experiences ceased after apostolic times, is a CAUSE of the discernment problems we're encountering so much today, the false signs and wonders, the New Apostolic Reformation and the like. Hidebound intellectualism interferes with true spiritual growth and experience, and interferes with the exercise of true spiritual discernment.

It also promotes a cynical mindset in those who have experienced something they can only call supernatural, leaving its understanding up to their own wildest imaginations. No wonder they fall for fleshly and demonic tricks since they know they are real at least and all the critics do is denounce what they haven't themselves experienced. No wonder if they get the source of such phenomena wrong because true supernatural spiritual discernment is not being encouraged, because it's not considered to be needed any more. In fact discerning of spirits is one of those spiritual gifts that supposedly stopped after the apostolic generation. We're supposed to rely only on intellectual understanding of the Bible, in a time when if we ever needed a God-inspired gift of discernment it's now. Proposition for a future blog topic if nothing else, the Lord willing I should live so long.

*OK, specifically he was burned at the stake for denying the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation.

Monday, July 23, 2012

Advanced Hermeneutics

It was a dark and stormy night. Rain beat against the tall north windows. A flash of lightning would have shown a figure stealthily tiptoeing down the stairs if there had been anyone there to see it. A shot would have rung out if it hadn't coincided with the crack of lightning that hit close to the house. In the morning a rat was found dead at the foot of the stairs, a bullet through its brain. The cat wouldn't even touch it, just sat nearby licking its haunches. When the detective arrived he immediately suspected Replacement Theology and called for the guests to gather in the parlor.
Don't ask.

[No, I was certainly not making any comparisons between The Harbinger and my goofy murder mystery. Just a moment of silly whimsy born of discouragement about the kind of thinking the Harbinger is up against.]

Sunday, July 15, 2012

The critics as usual missing the point completely. My last post on The Harbinger? I can only hope.

Well I did get to hear Brannon Howse's latest program on The Harbinger. (NOTE: It will only be available for two weeks and then you have to pay to hear it).

More of the same.

I'd like to keep it simple if possible:

They have NOTHING to say about the book itself and they still don't get what it's all about. Brannon still hasn't read it but Jimmy DeYoung says he has and yet he doesn't get it either.

ALL they have is the accusations about side issues they've been amassing for weeks now, about Jonathan Cahn's associations with NAR (New Apostolic Reformation) people (they have only ONE instance of that, by the way, and they ignore his objection that he doesn't know enough about the NAR to agree or disagree with them), his appearance on Glenn Beck and Sid Roth, the fact that he believes God may still speak to His people through dreams and prophecies and the like (in connection with the ONE fictional dream that occurs in the book, the only thing in the book that even remotely justifies any of their accusations, and their ONLY reference to the book itself).

Then they go on to Joseph Farah who made the film based on the book, The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment, but do they say anything about the film? Nope, NOT A WORD, they are content to go back to a World Net Daily article in May of 2005 in which Farah endorses a book called The Mega Shift. They spend at least ten minutes on this book, which, I agree, is clearly an example of the end-time apostate doctrine of Dominionism, and does unfortunately reveal a lack of discernment on the part of Farah. But that's ALL they talk about and obviously they think they have discredited the film based on The Harbinger by talking about this OTHER book, though The Harbinger has nothing to do with Dominionism, and Farah's unfortunate lack of discernment in that case does not prove a thing about his film The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment.

Yet they claim they aren't arguing guilt by association.


And because they have a good reputation among discernment ministries others are jumping on their bandwagon also without reading the book and also not getting what it's really all about.

Again, the book is ALL ABOUT THE HARBINGERS, REAL OCCURRENCES IN THE REAL WORLD THAT UNCANNILY PRECISELY REPEAT THE EVENTS AND ATTITUDE OF ISAIAH 9:10. That's what the average reader finds so compelling about the book, that's the point of the book. Missing that is missing it completely.

It's really amazing that they address EVERYTHING BUT THE POINT OF THE BOOK.

Again, let me make it clear: If the book was at all based on NAR beliefs or gnosticism or mysticism, showed any compromise with false doctrine, I'd have to agree with the critics. But it isn't and it doesn't. DESPITE all these peripheral concerns, legitimate enough in their own right (though far from proven against Jonathan Cahn), the book's message remains valid, utterly untouched by any of these attempts to undermine it.

The harbingers are REAL occurrences in real reality, so far beyond coincidence or human manipulation the theology and eschatology of Jonathan Cahn is irrelevant. He's just the reporter. Maybe you don't like the sort of messenger God chose for the purpose, but God didn't ask you. The critics have remained blind to this one central fact.


AS IT IS YOU ARE JUST BLOWING HOT AIR. Destructive hot air, smearing innocent people, but still just hot air.

The harbingers are portents of God's judgment on the nation because they literally repeat the same situation in America that occurred in Israel as described in Isaiah 9:10 -- fallen bricks, sycamore tree, the determination to rebuild and replant with stronger materials -- the exact same materials Israel intended to use, same kind of stone, same kind of tree. The verse describes God's judgment in the form of an attack by Assyria and Israel's defiant attitude toward it instead of repentance, which is going to bring further judgment as subsequent verses make clear. The repetition of the same literal events in America, the fallen buildings to be replaced by a better building with a quarried cornerstone, and a single symbolic sycamore tree that was replaced by a pine type tree, and the attitude of defiance saying we'll build and plant bigger and better -- even spoken unwittingly by some of America's leaders -- is something that could only come from God Himself. This is no simple call to repentance that anyone could have given who is tuned into the sins of America, this is a declaration of God's judgment apparently given to us by God Himself.

The critics don't get it and they don't seem to care. They are content to tar Cahn with insinuations and innuendoes and leave it at that.

What else is there to say really? Time to commit this to God, pray and trust in Him, there's really nothing more to say.

Saturday, July 14, 2012

More of same: Harbinger

For some reason I'm not able to access Brannon Howse's Friday programs until the following Monday, so I won't be able to hear yesterday's either until Monday.

I've been hearing rumors, however, that he's continuing his sadly misguided attacks on the Harbinger and on those who defend the Harbinger.

This really IS sad. Obviously he's got himself convinced that he's on the righteous side of this, which gives him license to trash others in the name of "discernment." I would hope that such a misdirected sense of certainty could yet be challenged by the truth he's so far failed to recognize and his eyes be opened to the errors he's been making. I feel the same way about T A McMahon whose Berean Call I used to appreciate a great deal.

It's still a puzzle how these reputable ministries have put themselves in this position, with such a wrong sense of rightness. So odd:
  • If they tend to focus a lot on the NAR then they accuse The Harbinger of promoting false prophecy. Nothing anyone says to show how wrong they are budges them off their self-conceived position.
  • Same with those who are acutely alert to anything that seems like replacement theology -- they hallucinate replacement theology in The Harbinger.
  • Some have this bee in their bonnet about false hermeneutics -- really weird when we're talking about one single OT verse that is VERY easy to understand -- except for those who misread it of course, making it out to be a message of reassurance of rebuilding rather than a statement of defiance of God -- THAT's the bad hermeneutic, the one preached by Daschle and Edwards.
  • Then there are some who came out of a gnostic background -- they read gnosticism into The Harbinger. Kabbalah, Zohar.
Well, Jonathan Cahn has answered all this and so have I and so have others. But the critics seem to have their ears plugged.

Oh well. There's no such thing as a move of God without opposition. Too bad, it does take a toll, and it's sad to see otherwise reputable Christian leaders on the wrong side of this.

Wish I could access Howse's broadcast, but at least I'll get to hear it on Monday and can add to this then.

I'll finish with my usual refrain: What the critics have to address is the harbingers themselves, those amazingly uncanny occurrences IN REALITY, that are completely independent of all theologies, eschatologies and opinions. They are REAL.

Friday, July 13, 2012

Christians are called to stand up against the sin of homosexuality and expect to be persecuted for doing so

On a recent radio show, Chris Pinto mentioned a video by a Pastor Scott Lively about the sin of homosexuality that was pulled from You Tube as "hate speech" so I went and found it. I don't belong to Facebook so I can't embed it here, but here's the whole page. Well worth listening to.

Nothing "hateful" about it, just a calm rational straightforward description of the situation. Whole history of the movement, and how Christians have been abdicating our calling to confront it.

Christians are being cowed by the aggressive tactics of "gay rights" and backing off when what is needed is standing firm against them.

Always always always it COSTS to defend God's truth. This includes even defending The Harbinger against some WITHIN the church who have failed to see what it's really all about and are as good as persecuting its defenders. We should rejoice when we are persecuted, scripture tells us, hard to do of course, but that's our calling, and it's only going to get worse as the end times progress and evil grows apace that we must stand up against. The cost of failing to stand will be the loss of spiritual power and spiritual discernment.

I feel I've been remiss on the topic of homosexuality, letting it slide instead of bringing God's word to bear on it as we are called to do.

Yes, prepare for persecution because the truth is now called "hate speech" and when that is fully in force we'll no longer have freedom of speech or religion. As Pastor Lively points out in his sermon, when some gay activists try to disrupt him, suppressing the speech of someone who disagrees with you is fascism. Blogger belongs to Google too, just as You Tube does, so just posting this puts me in line for persecution.

Thursday, July 12, 2012

Hey, another blogger who gets it about The Harbinger

Don't know a thing about this blog, and the tone of it leaves something to be desired perhaps, so I'm not endorsing anything about it except a few quotes I found that I agree with about The Harbinger.

The people who GET IT zero in on the harbingers themselves and recognize that they occurred in reality, couldn't have been invented by Jonathan Cahn, are something he was led to. The ones who don't get it get all mired down in terminology and miss the point completely.

Just a few quotes from this blog:

The Biblical insight that is revealed in these 253 pages is jaw-droppingly amazing!

What happens is that one “coincidence” relating to Isaiah 9:10 and September 11th gets placed on top of another “coincidence”, and then another one on top of that. And then another one, and another one, and pretty soon the incredible “coincidences” just begin dog-piling on top of each other until it finally reaches the point that only a blind person (or a “pseudo-atheist”) could deny that what Jonathan Cahn has unveiled is an authentic, Divine prophetic warning from the Old Testament that relates every bit as much to contemporary America as it did to ancient Israel!

... So, didn’t surprise me to find ‘The Harbinger’ making the claim that 9/11 was a chastisement from God and a warning that even worse chastisement is coming unless this nation repents from its wickedness and turns toward God. [Overturning the concept of legal abortions is the VERY FIRST step I would recommend to you, America!]

But what did catch me by surprise in ‘The Harbinger’ was seeing how remarkably the Isaiah 9:10 & 11 verses apply to America’s 9/11 disaster and the subsequent events and prideful attitudes adopted by our so-called “leaders”. Even down to the smallest details in that Bible verse and the smallest details of those tragic events a decade ago – the how, when, and where of their unfolding – are captured in this truly mind-boggling book.

Regardless of how much or how little a reader currently knows about The Holy Bible and Biblical prophecy, ‘The Harbinger’ is going to snap his or her eyes wide open and shake their being to the very core.
Always nice to find someone who also GETS IT.

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Another off-the-wall criticism of The Harbinger, by Thomas Ice

Update: Here's Jonathan Cahn's answer to Thomas Ice, linked as a Page in the margin.

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

Another misbegotten criticism of The Harbinger from Brannon Howse's site.

Oh please Lord, bring some sanity to this issue, inspire some Christian leaders to defend the Harbinger against all this nonsense.
A Critical Look at The Harbinger
Tom's Perspectives

by Thomas Ice

"The bricks have fallen down,
But we will rebuild with smooth stones;
The sycamores have been cut down,
But we will replace them with cedars."
-Isaiah 9:10
First off, that's a bad translation. It's stone cut from a mountain or a quarry that they intend to rebuild with, cut stone, hewn stone, not "smooth" stone. Just another Bible-distorting legacy from Westcott and Hort.
The Harbinger[1] is a fictional account of what its author, Messianic Rabbi Jonathan Cahn believes is a scenario that is on the verge of happening to America, unless there is national repentance.
While this statement isn't false, I have to object that to start with the emphasis on judgment that is about to come, and the need for repentance, skews the meaning of the book in a very subtle way, and suggests that the writer doesn't really grasp the import of the book.  There are people who need to know that the nation is under judgment, but many of us already know that America is under judgment and can expect more to come, and that repentance is the only answer. We don't need a book to tell us that, and while the book does make that point the WAY it makes it is what it is really all about.

The book is about the "harbingers" that occurred in the wake of 9/11, literal material actual occurrences that precisely reflect a verse in the Old Testament book of the prophet Isaiah, verse 9:10. The appearance of these harbingers could only have been brought about by God Himself, and that being the case it is God Himself who is for some reason acting in a very unusual personal way to warn America of the judgment we are under. This is the core of the book and this is where any meaningful discussion of it should start, but it is precisely this central message that all the critics so far fail to grasp, while they go on and on about side issues that don't even have anything to do with the book rightly understood.
This New York Times bestseller, though written as a work of fiction, it is clear that Cahn believes his nine harbingers are truly a pronouncement of impending judgment against the United States. At the beginning of the book it says, "What you are about to read is presented in the form of a story, but what is contained within the story is real." If this was not clear from the book, it is made very clear when one views any number of the one-hour presentations of this material by Cahn on the internet's YouTube. There is even a two-hour DVD movie entitled: The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment[2] with Cahn. The question that any Bible-believing Christian should ask about The Harbinger is as follows: "Is this really a true message or revelation from God?"
It's a good sign that Thomas Ice appears to have actually read the book, seen the movie, and heard some of Jonathan Cahn's other presentations. So far so good.
Is America A Covenant Nation?

Rabbi Cahn begins his presentation by saying that there are only two nations in the history of the world who are in covenant relation with God. They are Israel and America. Israel is clearly in a direct covenant relationship with God . . . but America? "But there was one other-a civilization also conceived and dedicated to the will of God from its conception . . . America." Cahn continues, "Those who laid America's foundations saw it as a new Israel, an Israel of the New World. And as with ancient Israel, they saw it as in covenant with God."[3]

Amazingly, the Jewish Christian Rabbi, Jonathan Cahn is advocating a form of replacement theology by presenting America as "a new Israel."
How is any "replacement" involved by merely speaking of TWO nations in covenant with God? What Ice quotes says America was "conceived and dedicated to the will of God from its conception." There is no equivalence in that with Israel's covenant with God implied here, merely a nation dedicated to God by godly men who wanted to model it after Israel as a nation under God's laws.

Again, why can't two nations be in covenant with God? The difference is obvious enough: God called Israel to be His own, and God Himself made the covenant with Israel. Nothing like that is implied for America by The Harbinger, but only that godly men sought to build a government on God's laws and dedicated it to God in hope of God's blessing their work. God can hardly fail to be pleased or to honor such an intention.
Israel and Israel alone is the Lord's only covenant nation. While there are a number of biblical passages that make it clear that the twelve tribes of Israel are God's lone covenant nation (Ex. 20:2; 34:27; Deut. 4:1, 6–8, 13, 20, 34, 37, 44; 7:6–8; 1 Kings 8:9), Psalm 147: 19–20 says, "He declares His words to Jacob, His statutes and His ordinances to Israel. He has not dealt thus with any nation; and as for His ordinances, they have not known them. Praise the Lord!" Only once in history did God choose to make a covenant with a nation and it was Israel.
Context, context, context. There is nothing stopping others from desiring to be under God's rule and dedicating their work to God in covenant form. Initiated by men, not God Himself, but still an intention God would honor. Why not?
If Cahn somehow thinks that America is a covenant nation with God because our founders primarily during the Colonial Period were devout Christians, which they were, that does not mean that God recognizes such nations as being in a covenantal relationship like Israel. Things like the Mayflower Compact were not made with God but horizontally between the Pilgrims to honor God and do other things. No doubt, the 167 years of Colonial America provided perhaps the greatest Christian basis for any nation in history, but somehow making our country a "covenant nation" like Israel simply could not and did not happen.
I suspect if Jonathan Cahn had any idea of the hairsplitting denunciations that would come against him for his book he'd have more carefully chosen his wording, but even as it is it's hard to avoid the impression that the critics are bending over backwards to find fault where there is none.
Cahn compounds his error by citing 2 Chronicles 7:14 (one of the most abused verses in the Bible) as God's message to America for today in one of the closing chapters. "And My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray, and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." Cahn applies this passage to America, not Israel as in the biblical context when he says: "It's the call of God to a nation once dedicated to His purposes but now falling away from His will. It's the call of God to return."[4]
This represents T. Ice's own theology which he is imposing on Cahn. He's apparently an Israel-only dispensationalist same as Jimmy DeYoung and no doubt denies that it has always been the Church that is in covenant with God, that the Church has inherited the Abrahamic covenant, that it is the Church who are "My people who are called by My name." Not America but Christians including American Christians -- American nonChristians wouldn't know what to do with the command anyway. And we certainly ARE called by 2 Chronicles 7:14 to humble ourselves and pray for our nation wherever we are.
Only Israel is called by the Lord's name. In the surrounding context of this passage the phrase "Thy people Israel" is used seven times in chapters six and seven in 2 Chronicles. The Lord declares, "but I have chosen Jerusalem that My name might be there and I have chosen David to be over My people Israel" (6:6). You don't volunteer to be God's chosen people, He must choose you and He has only chosen the nation of Israel!
Yes, but the Church IS Israel. I know I'm courting the accusation of replacement theology by saying this, but I'm probably not speaking for Jonathan Cahn here anyway, but God HAS chosen the Church and always HAS chosen the Church, the true believers going back before Israel, the Remnant. The ELECT. The Messiah came for that Remnant, saves that Remnant, The Elect, not national Israel. Not America either, but the Church. It's the Church that has the responsibility to pray for America. And for Israel too for that matter, which even in its current apostate condition is scripturally slated to play a role in the last days, out of which many will be saved.
The Harbingers

What bothers me the most about this book is that Cahn, who appears to be a strongly committed Christian and zealous in his work for the Lord, is not zealous to protect and rightly handle the Scriptures. How can anyone take a passage that is clearly addressed to Israel (Isa. 9:10) and one that has already been fulfilled in history for Israel and say that it also applies in some way to America
There is only a single meaning to any passage in the entire canon of Scripture.
NONSENSE, BALDERDASH, POPPYCOCK. This is just Ice's own false dispensationalist theology that is not shared by MANY others of the Church.

Sometimes Old Testament passages have double references to begin with, referring to events in the prophet's own time AND to later fulfillment as well, such as in description of the Messiah when He came.

But beyond that, Christians have ALWAYS read the Old Testament to apply to ourselves and to our own times as guided by the Holy Spirit as we read.

And beyond that, Cahn did not even suggest anything BUT a single meaning to Isaiah 9:10 ANYWAY.
Yet, Rabbi Cahn claims that Isaiah 9:10 also is a prophecy about contemporary America.
HE DOES NOT! He has observed that God Himself brought elements of that verse into America in relation to 9/11 and has drawn the only reasonable conclusion from that fact that it is God Himself who is making a connection between that verse and America. NOT A CONNECTION THAT WAS THERE BEFORE but one that is obviously there NOW. Through the HARBINGERS God Himself brought about.
He admits that it was fulfilled in the past in relation to the Northern Kingdom by the invasion of the Assyrians.[5] But it is also a prophecy relating to contemporary America as a mystery that needs to be uncovered.
See above. There is NO implication in The Harbinger that Isaiah 9:10 applied to anything but Israel when it was written, and not even an implication that it contains some hidden implication for America either. AGAIN, it is the fact that the harbingers that reflect that verse have appeared in reality in America in connection with 9/11 that now ESTABLISHES the implication that God is NOW talking to America through that verse.

Seems to me this ought to be obvious and it's hard to explain why it isn't obvious to some.
Cahn claims that when the mystery is unraveled, the same pattern of judgment that happened two and a half thousand years ago will be repeated upon America.
Well, yes, of course, it's the OBVIOUS conclusion to be drawn from the APPEARANCE OF THE HARBINGERS.
"The Nine Harbingers that manifested in ancient Israel in the nation's last days," explains Cahn, "Each one was a sign. Each one was a warning of judgment . . . of their end . . . the Nine Harbingers of judgment."[6]

For Cahn, these nine harbingers are something he says is revealed to be for America.
Yes, this is obvious to anyone who isn't shackled with some sort of theological / eschatological preconception that is as good as wearing blinders.  
[7] Thus, he is under the delusion that some kind of revelation from God to him has taken place via the warnings of American judgment.
No, not "via" the warnings. The warnings are implicit in the fact that these harbingers have occurred in America that so uncannily reflect Isaiah 9:10. If you can't see the harbingers it is you who are under delusion.
Yet, it is somehow linked with Isaiah 9:10 and a series of interesting events that have taken place in conjunction with the attack on the Twin Towers in New York City during 9/11 and various events and statements by important people since that event.. Since America was called to be "a vessel of redemption, an instrument of God's purposes, a light to the world,"[8] and was no longer performing that role, God is giving her a warning of impending judgment upon our nation in the form of the nine harbingers of Isaiah 9:10.
Yes, that's how Cahn explains the fact that the harbingers were given to America, but that's getting the cart before the horse. The fact is that the harbingers are simply THERE, brought about as a result of 9/11, however they are to be explained. You have to address THAT FACT FIRST, the fact that they are THERE, they exist, you can point to them, there are pictures of them or you can take pictures of them yourself or in the case of the speeches hear them or read them over the internet.
The first is a breach in the wall, which means that at 9/11 America's divine protection no longer was in place.[9] Second, the terrorist represents America invading Iraq that was in ancient times the location of Assyria that invaded Israel in the eight century b.c.[10] Third, the fallen bricks speak of the nation not repenting, but becoming arrogant and saying they will build the ruins back stronger and better than at the first.[11] Fourth, the tower represents the leaders not repenting and desiring to rebuild the towers even higher than before.[12] Fifth, the Gazit Stone tells of the foundations and the huge "Freedom Stone" at Ground Zero.[13] Sixth, the sycamore tree is symbolic of the uprooting of the nation through judgment.[14] Seventh, the Erez tree is a tree of hope and pictures a stubborn nation's failure to repent and turn to God.[15] Eight, the utterance of actual judgment upon America.[16] Ninth, the prophecy of judgment reiterated upon America, but she can repent if she heeds the warning of 2 Chronicles 7:14.[17]
Yeah, that's a decent enough summary if oddly enough worded to suggest he doesn't really get it. (The erez tree is NOT a tree of hope, for instance, merely falsely called that by those who dedicated it. The bricks don't speak of the nation not repenting, the intention to rebuild with stronger materials is what speaks of that, and so on) Obviously he doesn't get it and doesn't have any answers to it.

Many American Christians are falling for the message found in The Harbinger as if Isaiah himself had been resurrected and came to America and spoke it himself.
Oh my aching head.  The harbingers were not put in place by Isaiah, they could only have been put in place by God. This again is what the critics keep refusing to think about. God made Isaiah's words come to material reality in America. Isaiah had nothing to do with it. The average reader gets it where the critics keep missing it.
Many might say, "What could be wrong with a message from any source telling America to repent?" Surely a majority of Americans do need to repent, but if we believe it on the basis of someone claiming to speak on an authority equal with the Bible, then we have fallen for a false authority.
Aaargh, gag, ack. JONATHAN CAHN HAS NOT CLAIMED TO SPEAK ON AN AUTHORITY EQUAL WITH THE BIBLE. He has merely POINTED OUT something that was done BY GOD that IMPLIES that GOD HIMSELF is calling us to repentance as He brings judgment on the nation.

Also, THE NATION ITSELF needs to repent. The nation has put laws in place that defy God, that violate God's laws. It would take repentance BY THE NATION'S LEADERS to push back God's judgment if that's even still possible, although the churches could go a long way to preserving the nation by heeding this call without the leaders' participation.
Besides, Paul has already told American and every human on the planet to repent in Acts 17:30–31. "Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead."
That being the case, you nevertheless have to account for why God Himself brought all these harbingers into America as if He Himself is calling us to be aware of His intention to bring judgment against America and he Himself is calling us to repent.  
If we start giving heed to those who claim to speak for the Lord, especially those who twist Scripture in the process, more and more people will come out with wacko books and mislead even more people.
Sorry, I'm losing it here. This is sheer idiocy. Why can't these people read?

Cahn is reporting on things that GOD DID. God is doing this, not Cahn. God gave Cahn the ability and the mission to RECOGNIZE the harbingers and to SHOW them to us, that's all.
Many are talking today about God judging America and He surely could do that in a dramatic way, but the focus of Paul, even two thousand years ago was on the fact that God has already fixed a day on His calendar when He will judge the world for unbelief. Yes, America is deserving of judgment but so is the entire world. Could anyone name a nation in the world today that does not deserve God's judgment?
It is God who brought about the harbingers, it is God who apparently wants to say something through them specifically to America.  
I cannot and I doubt that you can name one either. Bible prophecy appears to indicate that this world is moving toward global judgment where America and all the Christ-rejecting nations will join the Antichrist's team in revolt against our Lord God Almighty, whom Christ will destroy with the breath of His mouth at the second coming when He will set up a righteous rule through His redeemed people Israel. Maranatha!
That's all true enough but it has nothing to do with the message of The Harbinger.  So you need to talk to God about this. Ask Him why He brought these harbingers to us.  

[1] Jonathan Cahn, The Harbinger: The Ancient Mystery That Holds The Secret of America's Future (Lake Mary, FL: FrontLine, 2011), 262 pages.
[2] Jonathan Cahn, The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment: Is There an Ancient Mystery that Foretells America's Future? DVD. Directed by George Escobar, 2012. 120 minutes.
[3] Cahn, The Harbinger, p. 19.
[4] Cahn, The Harbinger, p. 222.
[5] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 16–18.
[6] Cahn, The Harbinger, p. 23.
[7] Cahn, The Harbinger, p. 23.
[8] Cahn, The Harbinger, p. 19.
[9] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 25–33.
[10] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 34–42.
[11] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 51–56.
[12] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 57–67.
[13] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 68–77.
[14] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 78–86.
[15] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 87–98.
[16] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 99–113.
[17] Cahn, The Harbinger, pp. 114–144.

New radio show on The Harbinger by Jan Markell's ministry

Had the privilege of getting to hear Jan Markell's upcoming weekend broadcast in advance, to be aired next Saturday the 14th, and am happy to report the program does a great job of covering the issues concerning The Harbinger that have been giving some of us headaches for a while now.

Jonathan Cahn gets a generous chance to defend his point of view, other participants have solid support to offer, Eric Barger gives a statement on behalf of Olive Tree Ministries, and there is a long clip of Joseph Farah of World Net Daily describing how he got involved with The Harbinger and came to make his film about it, The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment.

These are the SANE people when it comes to The Harbinger. It did me good to hear it, felt kinks unwinding just listening to them. Yeah I've been collecting some Harbinger kinks as it were for a while now.

It's so hard to understand the frame of mind of those who have been attacking this book, their self-righteous denunciations that for the most part completely misrepresent it.

My own immediate take on the book was very much like Joseph Farah's as he reports it on this broadcast: even from just a few statements heard in an interview of Jonathan Cahn it is apparent that there is something amazing here that needs to be followed up. I followed up by listening to everything I could find by Cahn on the internet and started blogging on this amazing story as soon as possible; and Farah contacted him and made a film about the harbingers.

Others, however, seem to respond instead to superficial impressions based on preconceptions that have nothing to do with The Harbinger, that lead them to outrageously wrong conclusions.

Should also mention here that I've changed my mind about a former position I took against Cahn's choice to appear on Glenn Beck's show or other shows with a questionable point of view. This was discussed on the program. I'm convinced now that it would be wrong to restrict Christians from appearing among nonChristians in the effort to make their case.

It's a good show that gets into all the important questions involving The Harbinger.

Cognitive failure in dealing with The Harbinger as expressed in a comment to my blog

I've been getting comments from a particular visitor for some time now which I've published as they come in but this is probably going to be the last one I'll publish. Thought I'd bring it up here and give an expanded answer to it here because it represents one of the most frustrating trends of criticism against the book.
Nowhere in Isaiah 9:10 has God declared A SIGN OR A MYSTERY which contains A REMOTE OR FUTURE IMPLICATION FOR AMERICA.
And nowhere in any of my posts and nowhere in The Harbinger has such a claim been made.

You are certainly right that the text itself contains no such reference, nor has God declared any such reference nor has anyone claimed such a reference exists. The future implication -- THINK CAREFULLY HERE -- based on the text but not IN the text -- comes from the fact that various events that precisely repeat the elements of Isaiah 9:10 have occurred in reality, in the real world, in actual fact on planet Earth, at Ground Zero in connection with 9/11. Again, NOBODY has claimed any implication of any of this exists IN THE TEXT ITSELF.
AND YOU HAVE FAILED MISERABLY to prove those claims and to SUBSTANTIATE THOSE HARBINGERS from the sacred text itself.
The text refers to destroyed bricks and sycamores as a result of Assyria's invasion of Israel, and Israel's intention to rebuild with hewn stone and replant with pine type trees, and the text demonstrates the defiant attitude of Israel against the destruction as having come from God's hand in judgment, as they determine to rebuild and replant with no regard to His will in the matter.

Nothing else is claimed about the text by Jonathan Cahn or by me.

The harbingers that have shown up in America IN CONNECTION WITH 9/11 are destroyed buildings and a huge hewn stone that was brought in to be the cornerstone of a new building in their place; a destroyed sycamore tree and a pine type tree brought in to replace it. These uncanny things having occurred IN REALITY are what you have to account for as coming from any source other than God Himself. Plus the attitude of defiance of God's judgment as expressed in quotations of Isaiah 9:10 by American leaders also in connection with 9/11, which all too accurately expressed the general attitude of the nation at the time.
In the facts described above to which you and the other critics of The Harbinger are spectacularly blind.
Dear Sir: Get a grip and think through what I have given you above.

This is probably the last time I allow a comment from you here. Make the most of it.

Another off-the-wall criticism of The Harbinger, by somebody Dinsmore

Found this at Brannon Howse's Worldview Weekend site.
-Mark Dinsmore

SETTING ASIDE the "ancient mystery" of the nine harbingers (depicted as pictographic clay seals in Jonathan Cahn's fictional story), there is another "secret" message that flows in the subtext of Cahn's New York Times bestseller, The Harbinger (TH). Evaluating this hidden stream requires some historic "archaeology" but will reveal that Cahn's nine harbingers are built not on Scripture but on sinking sand.
Funny, I'm getting a sinking feeling already.
Cahn's fictional Prophet recounts the "consecration" of America by George Washington (GW) in a manner which stirs reverential awe among many Christian Patriots.
Oh maybe, but the main stirring one gets comes from the recognition of the awesome fact that America's first President George Washington and his cabinet prayed for America on the very land where the WTC was built and attacked. I guess Dinsmore is unimpressed with such an uncanny coincidence.
But early in the book, Cahn acknowledges that "those who laid America's foundations" came "long before the Founding Fathers" (p.19). This can only refer to the Pilgrims and Puritans. However, the central premise of TH-that the attack and subsequent destruction of the Twin Towers on 9/11 at "Ground Zero" was prophetic-is based on Cahn's repeated assertion that divine judgment must strike "the nation's most sacred ground, the ground of its consecration" (p.198). Cahn's fictional Prophet reiterates this as a de facto spiritual law: "This, Nouriel, is a critical principle. Take note of it" (p.198).

Given this declaration, the terrorists of 9/11-guided by this "ancient mystery"-should have targeted a site commemorating the first Pilgrim landing and "consecration to God" under the Mayflower Compact in Plymouth, MA. After all, the language of this historic document is far more "sacred" and intrinsically Christian than either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. But instead, Cahn maintains that the "grounds of consecration" are adjacent to "Ground Zero" in New York.
Yeah, you could ask that, but the fact is that Ground Zero happens to be where George Washington prayed for the nation. It wasn't the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution which occurred at Ground Zero, it was Washington's prayer, and Washington was the first President of the UNITED States as a federal -- UNITED -- nation.

Aaa, just a meaningless coincidence I guess.
According to TH, therefore, the fate of the Twin Towers (and the free-fall collapse of 47-story Building 7, which Cahn neglects to mention) was mysteriously sealed on April 20, 1789-212 years prior to 9/11 (pp.199-205).
Oh fer cryin out loud. Cahn is working backwards from the amazing appearance of the harbingers that so remarkably repeat Isaiah 9:10, from their location which anybody ought to be able to recognize has historical significance for America, to the date on which the nation was consecrated by Washington's prayer at that very site, and comes to the CONCLUSION that God took note of Washington's prayer and is now giving the nation warning through the harbingers He brought about on that very site. It takes special exertion to DENY such obvious connections once they're pointed out.
The entire foundation of Cahn's nine harbingers, therefore, is built on the presumed spiritual significance and efficacy of our first president's inauguration on that historic day (pp.207,208,210,211,212).
No, it's not "built" on that at all. As I understand it, Cahn discovered this later in his investigations. The existence of the harbingers is uncanny enough but then he discovered the significance of Ground Zero as property that had been owned by the very church in which George Washington prayed for the nation. Once you recognize that fact, you'd have to go to extraordinary lengths, it seems to me, NOT to draw the conclusion that God must be making some connection here.

Sycamore tree,
echoing the sycamores of Isaiah 9:10,
uprooted by a piece of one of the towers falling on it on 9/11,
turns out to have been growing in the graveyard of an old church that once owned the property on which the WTC was built,
is celebrated by spiritually blind people in a sentimental way that in fact emphasizes its significance as a sign of God's judgment on the nation,
who even cast its roots in bronze,
then even gets replaced by the same kind of tree Israel said they'd replace their sycamores with, a pine type tree.
All at Ground Zero where America's first President prayed for the nation.

Aaa, just a meaningless coincidence.
(It would seem significant to note, however, that these three demolished towers were not public buildings; they were not federal; they were not religious. They were, in fact, private office complexes. Why would God appoint, or allow, these structures to be targeted as a direct sign of some "ancient mystery" that allegedly "holds the secret of America's future"? This unsupportable claim is, quite simply, preposterous!)
Oh I dunno, maybe because the WTC was built on land originally owned by the church where Washington prayed for the nation, and maybe because the WTC was iconic of New York City and the wealth of the nation, and maybe because some events described in Isaiah 9:10 were repeated there in the wake of 9/11.

Naaa, just a meaningless coincidence.
Throughout TH, Cahn insists that the mere utterance of Isaiah 9:10 by an elected official-either "unwittingly" (pp.63,105) or "unknowingly" (pp.111, 117)-in conjunction with 9/11, constitutes the echoing of an ancient vow (pp. 93,117)-which TH asserts are binding words of cosmological consequence for the entire United States.
What kind of obtuseness does it take to blind oneself to these uncanny significances? "Mere" utterance of the verse by two American leaders in an official capacity connected with 9/11, the very verse whose bricks and quarried stones and sycamores and pine type trees were all echoed in amazing uncanny reality in connection with 9/11? Aaaa...
As "proof" that the ungodly can (and do) prophesy over a nation in accordance with God's Word, Cahn gives the example of Caiaphas in John 11:49-53. However, he stretches this principle beyond Israel, and beyond the office of High Priest, to include any ceremonial words spoken by a common U.S. politician that might happen to include Scripture. (pp.118-19) If that is the case, then how many thousands of times have elected officials misappropriated Scripture in the past? And what forces and curses have been "unwittingly" and "unknowingly" unleashed upon our land by their rash words and vows? Words do have meaning.
What kind of mental gymnastics does it take to deny the MULTIPLE lines of connections with THESE PARTICULAR utterances? The connection with 9/11, the harbingers that are also about 9/11, the location of the harbingers on the ground connected with the earliest official prayer for the nation, the ceremonies performed to celebrate the harbingers, the fact that all the speeches expressed America's defiance of the destruction of 9/11 as God's judgment on the nation -- all things done in connection with 9/11 in a remarkable uncanny echo of the same kind of events and attitudes as described in Isaiah 9:10.
But TH clearly advances the occult Word-Faith doctrine that words have intrinsic power and spiritual effect, "whether we know it or not."
Sigh. There is nothing "occult" or "Word-Faith" about this, and no implication that "words have intrinsic power and spiritual effect," there is merely the observation that speeches given by the leaders of a nation have special import and in this case particularly special import because they quote a verse from scripture that in its original context expressed Israel's defiance of God, a verse that is echoed all over the place in connection with 9/11 and therefore also expresses AMERICA's defiance of God. It is an astute observation by Jonathan Cahn that such official declarations in connection with all the OTHER harbingers related to Isaiah 9:10 amount to prophetic statements on behalf of the nation. ALL THESE IMPLICATIONS have to have been brought about by God Himself. There is nothing INTRINSIC in words themselves.
As Dave Hunt and TBC have long exposed, this is witchcraft!
No, it's a recognition of God's hand in an amazing collection of uncanny events. I don't know a thing about this man Dinsmore but if he claims to have discernment of things Christian he's WAAAAY off target.
Readers who are drawn into this mystical mindset of TH are quickly mesmerized by Cahn's droning repetition of words like "ancient...mystery...vow...sacred...ground...secret...key" and other terms synonymous with neo-gnostic religion.
I've answered this silliness before. The critics jump at words that remind them of something gnostic and completely ignore their context in this book. Cahn does not use these words in the sense the critics impute to him. There is nothing "mystical" about his use of them. These critics are letting their own preoccupations color their judgment of this book instead of THINKING -- about the context in which the book uses such terms.
Indeed, such concepts are the very essence of Masonic pomp and circumstance, as well as an integral part of the occultic "strategic spiritual warfare" practices of the NAR/Latter Rain movement. (This correlation simply proves that professing Christians are susceptible to the same ancient deceptions, resulting in aberrant and unbiblical practices, that are manifested in every era; see Ecc 1:9).
I'm afraid all it proves is that this critic doesn't know how to read objectively in context, and is imputing a completely false theology to Jonathan Cahn.

I'm putting up a post on a radio show by Jan Markell on The Harbinger later today, which I hope people will listen to. It deals with this sort of wacky criticism of the book among other things.
Given this fact, it is nonetheless cause for dismay-and shock, to many-to discover that contrary to the romantic view most of us grew up with, the United States was "consecrated" and "dedicated" not to the God of Scripture but to the god of Freemasonry.
Yes, I had this experience myself rather recently, having to recognize that the main founders of the Constitutional period were not Christians. But I believe Jonathan Cahn has answered the implication that therefore the nation was "consecrated" not to God but to the false masonic god by pointing out that the dedication itself would be what God would honor, not the person who makes the dedication.

In any case, what needs to be recognized here is the fact that the many harbingers based on Isaiah 9:10 have shown up on the very ground where this consecration occurred. This does suggest that there WAS a consecration that God recognized, that the nation's current defiance of His will violates to such an extent that He is removing His protection of the nation. It's a reasonable conclusion from the FACTS that Jonathan Cahn has collected and shown to us in his book.
The reader should understand that we are not defaming George Washington or calling his personal salvation into question through "guilt by association." No one can ultimately determine the condition of our first president's heart during the period of his admirable and sacrificial service to our country.
George Washington refused to take communion in his Anglican church which alone suggests a great deal about the condition of his heart. But again, his heart is not what determines the effect of his acting as our first President in praying that God would bless this new nation upon his inauguration, and in fact on its inauguration. The nation was in fact highly blessed by God over the years since then.
However, we can most certainly ascertain whether GW's willing participation in Ancient York Rite Freemasonry was in accordance with Scripture-and whether the Lodge's direct oversight of the very act of "consecrating" the United States was a pleasing aroma to God-or whether it was an abomination of "strange fire." (Even today, many patriots and professing Christians continue to be deceived by and through their "innocent" or "ignorant" membership in Freemasonry.)
Again, the PERSON is not the basis for God's blessing or not blessing the nation. Solomon was not exactly a paragon of faithfulness to God with all his pagan wives and concubines and idolatrous religious practices. Does that mean we are to dismiss his dedication of the temple to God as "really" to the pagan gods he also honored?
But curiously, for an author who has taken great pains to present the appearance of a factual, historical account that claims precision in the smallest detail (pp. 3,94,106,216, etc.); Cahn fails to mention anywhere in TH that our first president was himself a Freemason, sworn into office with his hand upon a Masonic Bible, with the oath given by the "Most Worshipful Grand Master" of New York Freemasonry, Robert Livingston (first Chancellor of New York City)
Sad facts I also lament, but see above.
Compounding this mysterious "oversight," Cahn deflects attempts at discernment, and redirects inquiry into GW's Masonic connections: "I would suggest something else: That this rather serves to illustrate the broad-brush attacks of judgment which has [sic] become typical of many 'discernment ministries'"

"Whatever Washington's other involvements may or may not have been," Cahn parries, "what does that have to do with the fact that he was part of a prayer gathering for America's future held within a church...? And how would that in any way nullify [The Harbinger]?" (Ibid.)

Seriously? Cahn discounts the political importance and spiritual significance of our first president's affiliation with, and participation in, a neo-gnostic mystery school? A demonstrably pagan, universalist cult which has permeated the United States government from Day One and has been intimately involved in its political and spiritual direction (and deception) ever since? To date, 1/3 of all Presidents, and 1/3 of all Supreme Court Justices are known Freemasons. (Can you imagine the outrage if this percentage had been Mormons instead of "Christians"?) In fact, this antichrist cult (which encompasses all faiths who believe in a Supreme Deity) has not only monopolized the halls of power in government but also in banking, business, and religious/philanthropic institutions. So, to answer Cahn's question, the fact of Freemasonry's undergirding and overarching influence in our nation's founding and "dedication" means everything.
I agree that our founding as a nation was lamentably very much something else than Christian, than what most of us had been taught, but it seems to me if you are going to stick to this way of interpreting things you still have to account for why God blessed the nation at all.

In any case, again, you have to come up with some kind of accounting for the fact that the attack on the WTC occurred on the very ground -- land that had been owned by that very church -- where George Washington and his governing body went to pray for the nation. The uncanniness of this fact can't just be swept away.

Also, that church is now screamingly apostate -- go read some of the "sermons" posted for Trinity Wall Street Church. It was most likely orthodox back in Washington's day. My own reading of this fact is that the apostasy of the churches is the main cause of God's bringing judgment against the nation now, as begun with 9/11.
As in the time of George Washington, Freemasons of all faiths still assemble in virtually every city and town in America. Like Glenn Beck and David Barton, they deem each other "brothers" and participate in "prayer gatherings within churches" (Cahn's sole criteria for judging GW). Should it not concern readers of TH that the god of Masonry invoked at GW's inauguration is not the God of Scripture? Or that its ancient, secret, binding vows supersede every other oath of office and trump biblical authority? Should it not disturb "discerners" that Masonry is quite literally a cornerstone of Mystery Babylon, whose doctrines of demons pave the way for a New Spiritual Order-one in which professing Christians, having their "eyes opened," become "wise," and bow to an Impostor (Mt 7:21-23, Jn 5:43)?

Therefore, regardless of whether or not George Washington realized the occult symbolism of "ancient secrets" in The Craft in which he participated, The Harbinger is hung by its own tongue when it declares the efficacy of ancient mysteries and spoken "vows." Because if America's consecration was performed by Masons to the Supreme Being they call "Providence," the "Almighty," the "Great Architect of the Universe," then our Lord does indeed have great cause to judge the United States.
Yes, and I'd like to see the Masons exposed once and for all and brought down, but again, why did He bless the nation at all as abundantly as He obviously did?
Not because our nation has abandoned the Masonic precepts conferred to and imparted by George Washington 223 years ago at "Ground Zero," but because it has almost universally embraced them.
Yes, but again, following this logic how do you account for the fact that God has blessed the nation at all?

And yet again, the point made by Jonathan Cahn is that the harbingers of judgment that have appeared in America, that are based on Isaiah 9:10 which speaks of a nation's defiance of God's judgment on that nation, quite remarkably showed up where George Washington prayed for the nation at its very inception. This needs to be recognized as the uncanny occurrence it is. It suggests to me that God honored that prayer despite the masonic influence, perhaps partly because George Washington DID believe in God's providence based on the nation's submission to His laws, and at least because the nation did adhere to God's laws until quite recently.

I myself hope Christians will come to recognize the anti-Christian mentality of the most prominent of the founders of the nation, which would give us better leverage for dealing with God's judgment, but as far as The Harbinger goes, this critic hasn't succeeded in falsifying Cahn's deduction that God is warning America of judgment yet to come through the appearance of the harbingers that so uncannily reflect Isaiah 9:10. These have to be recognized as something God Himself brought about in America as a result of 9/11.

This is still what the critics have to account for.

Friday, July 6, 2012


Update July 9, last part of interview discussed below.

This is really distressing. I do not understand how so many reputable Christians can be so wrong while feeling so right about what they are saying about The Harbinger.

How can there be a problem with hermeneutics about one simple verse in Isaiah (9:10) that simply demonstrates that God brought judgment against Israel, in the form of an invasion that destroyed buildings and trees, and that Israel's attitude was defiance?

There is nothing complicated about the verse, and nothing is changed in its interpretation by including the entire context before and after it either.

Yet they continue to treat it as if Jonathan Cahn himself had made up the "harbingers," the events that so uncannily repeat the elements of that verse, and get carried away about his supposedly wrong hermeneutic in applying the verse to modern America. How can they get this SO wrong?
Cahn didn't apply anything to America, he DISCOVERED the harbingers existing in REALITY. The harbingers are simply THERE, out there in REALITY.

What is the matter with these people?

As for "mysticism" there is ONE dream toward the end of the book that was the fictional device for introducing the consecration of America to God by George Washington. Jimmy DeYoung actually says this accounts for a "major portion" of the book. Again, this dream occurs at the very end of the book after all the harbingers have been demonstrated to exist and the dream is simply a way to introduce the idea that God does have a special relationship with America. Of course they also refuse to accept the idea of such a relationship no matter what various founders had in mind, both the early Puritan settlers and the federal government of Washington. The problem here is their dispensationalism that denies that God would take such a role toward any nation other than Israel.

Then there is the discovery that Jonathan Cahn quoted the mystical writing The Zohar in a talk he gave, expressing enthusiasm for the fact that the Zohar in its reference to "Golgotha" appears to recognize something yet to come about the crucifixion of the Messiah. Cahn tries to explain this in terms of the testimony of a hostile witness carrying a great deal of weight in a court of law and they can't hear it. To them if he quoted the Zohar that only means he's promoting the Zohar.

Please, this is stupid. These men aren't stupid but this is stupid and most of what they are saying about Jonathan Cahn and The Harbinger is stupid. They even resort to appealing to their training and their credentials as if that can make stupid statements intelligent.

Well, all I'm doing is repeating myself. Same conclusion I came to below.

This is exhausting. This is insane. Today (July 5) Brannon Howse is replaying some of the interview with Jonathan Cahn from his program on the 3rd, with Jimmy DeYoung there to give his answer to it.

I'll just jump to my conclusion because it would be exhausting and probably futile anyway by now to try to wend my way there through the thicket of bizarre misunderstandings:

Jonathan got put through a theological shredder, drawn into the completely irrelevant theological proccupations of Howse and DeYoung, and I hope at least he now knows he has to avoid this sort of thing in future: stick to the message of The Harbinger, stay off the rabbit trails, which ALL these theological preoccupations are in the context of The Harbinger. There was no way to know this in advance, but it's painfully clear now that no good can come of trying to answer them.

As I keep saying, what the critics MUST account for is the reality of the events called "harbingers" as they appeared in REALITY, in AMERICA, in the wake of 9/11, events which UNCANNILY precisely repeat the elements of Isaiah 9:10. Their reality, the uncanniness of them, needs to be drummed into the heads of these people who keep getting mired in extraneous concerns. They ARE extraneous to the meaning of the book. The book stands completely apart from such theological considerations.

Isaiah 9:10 makes a very simple statement about destruction brought by God to ancient Israel, and Israel's refusal to take this as judgment from God, declaring that they will rebuild the destroyed buildings and replant the destroyed trees.

And then those same events described in Isaiah 9:10 that happened in Israel also happened in America, including the same attitude of defiance toward God, all these same elements showing up in America IN REALITY in connection with 9/11. IT'S SIMPLE.

Amazing, mind-blowing, but SIMPLE.

In this sort of situation all you can do is KEEP IT SIMPLE, even painfully repetitive if necessary.

There is NO need for any discussion of hermeneutics, there is no need to get into differing opinions of eschatological events, there is no need to argue about the gifts for today -- NONE of that matters in the context of the message of The Harbinger. The Harbinger is ALL in the REAL appearance of the events called the "harbingers" that so precisely repeat the events of Isaiah 9:10.

They need to acknowledge this reality and then it's THEIR problem how to fit that reality into their theology and their eschatology. It's not Cahn's responsibility to answer all their questions. But of course, again, this wasn't apparent at first, it only seems right to try to account for your beliefs since they are making so much of them, but it turns out there is nothing constructive in the effort.


IF you can get across the simple truth of the amazing uncanniness of the harbingers based on Isaiah 9:10 THEN you can try to go on to their further implications such as their appearance at the site of Washington's consecration of America to God, the Buttonwood Agreement and the other Old-Testament-based signs connected with the Shemitah, but with people who are determined to throw out the whole lot based on their own irrelevant preconceptions, the point is to get the simple stuff acknowledged FIRST. Spend a whole hour on the sycamore alone if necessary. If they try to deny that the harbingers ARE precise echoes of Isaiah 9:10 I don't know if there is a cure for that degree of denseness but simple hammering at the facts seems about all that can be done in any case. Again, all those questions are only a distraction from the message of The Harbinger and confuse listeners.

This is just a species of Categorical Thinking, of Howse and DeYoung having such an iron grip on a particular way of construing theology they can't even hear an opposing viewpoint. The mind has hardened to concrete around its categories and there is no point in trying to break through it. You're just beating your head against all the preconceptions. They have the ability to grind to bits any opposing point of view as it comes at them.

Just stick to the simplest simplest simplest possible statement of facts.

They need to acknowledge the reality of the harbingers and then it's THEIR problem how to fit that reality into their theology and their eschatology.


Aside from that general assessment, a few words about a couple of the main points that were discussed:

Howse and DeYoung make much of the fact that there is a dream in the story, both of them apparently very confused about the fact that Jonathan says the dream is not real in the context of the statement at the front of the book that the facts are real.

The dream as part of the fictional narrative is the FICTIONAL source of some of the FACTUAL information in the book. Cahn is VERY clear that it's fiction, part of the story but that the FACTS, what is TRUE in the story, which they seem to be so crazily confused about, did not IN REALITY come from a dream. None of the FACTS came IN REALITY from a dream. The dream is a FICTIONAL DEVICE, period.

But because Howse asks what Jonathan thinks about receiving truth from God in dreams he feels obliged to try to answer honestly that he thinks God can speak in that way as well as many other ways these days because he does not believe the theology that says all such ways of God's speaking to His people stopped with the closing of the canon.

So Jimmy DeYoung takes the opportunity to spell out his own theology about how it DID all stop, leaving no room for respectable dissent from his theology -- no, it IS as he says it is and Cahn is a heretic for believing otherwise. Cahn is trying graciously to allow disagreement on these things, but Howse and DeYoung aren't willing to allow disagreement on these points, or even allow a lack of having studied the issue sufficiently to have a clear opinion.

This theology has nothing whatever to do with the message of The Harbinger, which went begging in the interview by Howse and is going begging again today.

Same with the character of The Prophet. The Prophet is part of the STORY, he is not REAL, but what he is leading the protagonist Nouriel to discover IS REAL. DeYoung even insists that if the Prophet's message is real, the Prophet himself must be real too -- or was it, if the Prophet is fiction the message must be fiction too --either case is so absurd I'm speechless. For half a second anyway.

Is all this clear to me only because I heard Jonathan speak on these things without the fictional structure of the book to interfere?

I don't think so because thousands have read the book and not been confused by these things.

What's left here?

Well, there's more that could be addressed, if there's any point.

Otherwise, prayer I guess, a lot of prayer, for wisdom of course, and that God will bring about what He wills from this theological train wreck.