James takes on Harbinger Seven, The Erez Tree Part 5: Again, is Isaiah ABOUT America?

And here comes this absolutely bizarre notion again that keeps cropping up in the thinking of The Harbinger's critics:

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:

[The Prophet] "The new tree was set into position to stand on the same spot where once had stood the Sycamore of Ground Zero."

[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."

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.

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.

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.

Update on my soul-searching about The Harbinger

The critics were getting to me: Perhaps, although I don't see it, I am deceived about it since they are so convinced it is a deception. The only way to find out would be to suspend my opinions and take some time off to think and pray about it.

I did that. I kept hoping for some sort of clear directive to kind of hit me from out of the blue as it were. Nothing happened. But when I went back to reading David James' book it was just as clear to me as ever that he is wrong in his criticisms. That apparently is God's answer and now I'm back to defending The Harbinger.