And finally, concerning the Erez tree, it must be noted once again that Cahn has at times tried to distance himself from his own words in the book by stating that Isaiah 9:10 is not a prophecy about America. However, it is virtually impossible to reconcile this claim with the following exchange:Often while reading this sort of thing in James' book I find myself sitting perplexed trying to figure out how he managed to get this idea out of that piece of writing.[The Prophet] "The new tree was set into position to stand on the same spot where once had stood the Sycamore of Ground Zero."The prophecy in Isaiah 9:10 cannot require anything to happen in America if it was not given to America. Yet repeatedly Cahn insists that each of the harbinger events had to happen in America after 9/11 because the Isaiah passage required them to happen. Once again, there is no amazing prophetic coincidence. There is no match. There is no parallel. And there is no harbinger.
[Kaplan]"What was it? What kind of tree?"
[The Prophet] "The most natural thing to have done would have been to replace the one Sycamore with another. But the prophecy required that the fallen Sycamore be replaced with a tree of an entirely different nature."
Cahn is not "trying to distance himself from his own words," he's trying to distance himself from this sort of bizarre misreading of his words.
He states that "Isaiah 9:10 is not a prophecy about America" because it isn't a prophecy about America and he never said it was, although James apparently thinks he's saying it is in the short dialogue he quotes above.
First, Isaiah 9:10 itself is not a prophecy and Cahn does not mean it is a prophecy EXCEPT as it becomes manifest in America. THEN it becomes a prophecy TO America. But in itself it is just a statement of a nation's defiance of God in planning to rebuild after God has brought judgment against them, instead of repenting for the sins that brought the judgment.
Once it is applied to America it is THEN a prophecy and it THEN "requires" replacing the Sycamore with the Erez because that's what Israel said they were going to do. For the verse to BE a prophecy to America events in America must follow the pattern described there. That's all he means by saying "the prophecy required" the planting of the Erez.
Isaiah 9:10 in itself does not "require" ANYTHING to happen and Cahn does not say it does. James is simply misreading and misunderstanding the whole thing.
Hard to understand how but obviously he is and since he so completely misread that I suppose he would misread my explanation as well.
Well, this finishes off James' section on the Erez Tree. On to the next section, Harbinger Eight, The Utterance.