More on why I'm defending the Harbinger

This "Harbinger" controversy is beginning to wear on me.

Still need to finish my response to Brannon Howse's radio show of August 6th which I started in a previous post. Finally they are trying to address the central point of The Harbinger which I've been yelling about for a while now, the fact that there doesn't seem to be any way to dismiss the "harbingers" themselves as coming from any source other than God. They can't be explained away as mere coincidence or explained on the basis of any particular theological position. They exist in reality, and to discuss all the supposed theological objections to the book without acknowledging that is like pointedly ignoring the elephant in the living room as they say.

CAVEATS, DISCLAIMERS AND CAUTIONARY PRINCIPLES REITERATED:
First, it's not the book itself I'm defending as much as the message I get out of the book, which I'd already gotten out of speeches and interviews before the book came out, that is, the meaning of the "harbingers" in America that echo Isaiah 9:10. I could have all kinds of objections to how the book is put together, various word choices and phrasings, but to my mind all that is not the point. It's the harbingers that are the point.

To say it again, I share the theological objections of the critics to the publisher of the book (Charisma House subsidiary Front Line), and to many of the personalities who have interviewed Jonathan Cahn, such as Jim Bakker, Sid Roth, and Pat Robertson. I don't know enough about their theologies to know how seriously out of line I would regard their views if I knew more but I know enough to know they are off in an area of the Christian community that I generally reject. I also gather from Jonathan Cahn's talk to a Messianic convention in 2005 (at You Tube) that he's more accepting of the idea of prophecy in the church today than I am, describing his messianic congregation or the messianic movement as a whole as "a prophetic people" and referring to certiain experiences as "prophetic" that I might see differently.

And I should also say that I don't regard any of this as insignificant either. Associations DO matter, of course. The Charismatic Movement promotes the idea that the supernatural gifts God gave to the Church in apostolic times continue today, a position which is rejected by most of the rest of the churches who say the gifts have stopped. Sometimes this rejection extends not only to the gifting of persons, with which I -pretty much agree, but also the occasional working of supernatural phenomena within the body of Christ, and that I don't agree with.

Such phenomena do occasionally still happen, and that to my mind could include isolated prophecies (See my post on Jan Hus) or visions or dreams from God, miraculous healings or other miraculous events, again not as the specific gifting of a person but at least as an occasional event for a specific purpose (It would have to have a specific purpose for the good of the body of Christ, it seems to me, to even be considered as authentic).

Nevertheless I realize this is also a problematic issue and I'm open to being convinced I should reject it all without reservation -- not yet convinced but open to it.

Most of such phenomena I've come to regard as something Watchman Nee and Jessie Penn Lewis identifed as "soul power," that is, as abilities related to the original endowment of the human race that were suppressed as a result of the Fall but still occasionally manifest as psychic powers, clairvoyance and that sort of thing. Such abilities are cultivated in various religions through meditation and physical disciplines and shamanistic rituals, and much of it involves demonic communications and influence as well. I used to regard the counterfeits as completely the work of the satanic hordes but I find Penn Lewis and Nee's explanation more realistic.

It's not always easy to tell the difference but I think it's very clear in some cases that this is what is really going on in charismatic circles but getting wrongly attributed to the Holy Spirit. I have no doubt this is what is behind Benny Hinn's "powers" and his predecessor Kathryn Kuhlman's, also William Branham who had an "angel" following him around and thought he was the Elijah of the last days. Also this is clearly what is manifesting in Rick Joyner's church, which I've discussed in earlier posts (examples of which are at You Tube), and in "prophetic readings" by Jill Austin, which I also discussed earlier, and the rest of the doings of those who make up the New Apostolic Reformation. It is no doubt also what's going on in Pat Robertson's "word of knowledge" segment of his show, and it seems to me that Sid Roth (who accepted Rick Joyner as a true prophet on his show) is deceived about these things and that the vast majority of the charismatic community are also taken in by them. The "revivals" such as the Toronto Blessing, "Holy Laughter" (Watchman Nee describes this counterfeit phenomenon back in the 30s in the Chinese churches, so it was far from new when it came to America in the 90s), the Brownsville Revival, and certainly Todd Bentley's bizarre carryings-on.

Calling out all this stuff as part of the Great Apostasy is the righteous work of the discernment ministries, but sometimes they do it with a heavy hand and not true spiritual discernment.

So here I've given a pretty broad indictment of the charismatic movement in general, and sometimes I wonder why I don't go all the way and reject everything that seems to have a supernatural origin.

It's just that I can't account for ALL such phenomena this way.

Can people be deceived by such phenomena, wrongly attribute it to God, and still be true Christians? I have to hope so because there have been many, including me, who have come out of the charismatic movement after gullibly accepting it for some time.

SO, after all that, given that The Harbinger has such associations, WHY DO I CONTINUE TO DEFEND IT?

Simply because I can't account for the appearance in the real world of what Cahn calls the "harbingers" by any such reasonings as the above, as mere coincidences, as anything that humans or demons could have concocted, as any kind of illusion, or as anything other than something God Himself must have done.

Also, the accusations of the book ARE predominantly a matter of associations and don't hold water as indictments of Cahn, such as for thinking himself a prophet, such as for equating God's covenant with Israel with America's godly consecrations from the past (by Winthrop for instance, or even Washington's prayer of consecration of the nation).

I can see that the book raises suspicions by some of its associations, by some of its terminology, and probably because it was written without adequately anticipating how some of its phrasings might be heard in some theological camps, and I'm not completely happy with some of Cahn's ways of conceptualizing his material either.

But nevertheless I cannot account for the "harbingers," particularly the ones based on Isaiah 9:10 (I have yet to fully grapple with the concept of the "shemitah") as anything but something only God could have brought about.
I can't. And so far none of the explanations anyone has given to account for them convince me.

Such as the explanations David James is giving on this radio show.

TO BE CONTINUED

Another out-of-body encounter with "Jesus"

Another Phony Near-Death Conversion. A regular epidemic of these deceptions coming on now. Like appearances of "Mary" and other demonic manifestations.

This one isn't new but I just happened to find it promoted by a Christian at another blog.

Atheist professor’s near-death experience in hell left him changed

By Mark Ellis

In some near-death experiences, people report they were drawn toward “the light.” But in this horrifying near-death experience for an atheist art professor, he was drawn into the darkness of hell, which dramatically altered the course of his life.

...On the last day of a three-week European art tour he led, his group had returned to their hotel in Paris after a visit to the artist Delacroix’s home and studio. As Howard stood in his room with his wife and another student, suddenly he screamed and dropped to the floor in agony.

[Later in the hospital] ...he had a very unusual out-of-body experience, and found himself standing next to his bed, looking at himself lying there. As he stood there, he noticed he didn’t feel the pain in his stomach. He felt more alive than ever, and his senses seemed more heightened than usual.

...“I saw my body lying on the bed, but I refused to believe it was me. How could that be me if I was standing there,” he wondered.

Suddenly he heard people outside the room calling for him by name. ..“Come with us,” they said. “Hurry up, let’s go.”

Howard left the room and started to walk with them down a long hallway, which was very dimly lit – almost dingy. “They took me on a very long journey through a grey space that got increasingly darker and darker,” he recalls.

They walked a long time, and Howard wondered why he was not tired when he had just suffered the worst day of his life.

...Howard’s fear and apprehension grew at the same time he lost trust in his guides. “Finally it was so dark I was terrified and I said, ‘I’m not going any farther. I want to go back.”

“You’re almost there,” one replied.

Howard dug in his heels. “I’m not going any farther,” he said firmly.

...His guides began to push and pull at him. Howard fought back, but he was horribly outnumbered.

“We had a big fight and the fight turned into them annihilating me, which they did slowly and with much relish,” he says. “Mostly they were biting and tearing at me. This went on for a long time. ...

He lay there motionless for a few moments, completely spent. Then he was surprised by a small voice inside his head that said, ‘Pray to God.’

He thought, ‘I don’t pray. I don’t even believe in God.’

Then he heard the voice a second time, ‘Pray to God.’

‘But I wouldn’t know how to pray even if I wanted to pray,’ he thought. Whose voice was this, he wondered? It sounded like his voice, but the words were completely foreign to his own thinking. Then he heard the voice a third time repeat the same message. His mind drifted back to his days in Sunday school as a child. “I tried to remember things I memorized when I was very young,” he says. He struggled to think of something he could pray.

Then he managed to blurt out, “The Lord is my shepherd and I shall not want…”

When the people around him heard his attempt to pray, they became enraged. “There is no God and nobody can hear you,” they cried, along with other obscenities. “If you keep praying we will really hurt you.”

But Howard noticed something curious. The more he prayed and began to mention God, the more they backed away from him.

Emboldened, he began to shout out bits and pieces of the Lord’s Prayer, “The Battle Hymn of the Republic,” and “God Bless America.” Finally, he was screaming any fragments of God’s truth he could muster from the moldy recesses of his memory bank.

It seemed to work! Even in the darkness, he could tell they had fled, but not too far away.

As he lay there, Howard began to review his life. “I came to the conclusion I led a crummy life and I had gone down the sewer pipe of the universe. I had gone into the septic tank with other human garbage. I was being processed by the garbage people into garbage like them.”

{Does he know they are demons?]

“Whatever life was supposed to be about, I missed it,” he thought. “What I received was what I deserved and the people who attacked me were people like me. They were my kindred spirits. Now I will be stuck with them forever.” Feelings of self-loathing and hopelessness filled his mind. His thoughts floated back again to himself as a nine-year-old in Sunday School, “I remembered myself singing “Jesus Loves Me,” and I could feel it inside me. As a child, I thought Jesus was really cool and he was my buddy and he would take care of me.”

...“I’ve got nothing else to lose. I’ll give Jesus a try.”

Then he yelled into the darkness, “Jesus, please save me!”

...Within an instant, a brilliant light appeared that came closer and closer. He found himself bathed in a beautiful light, and for the first time he could clearly see his own body’s miserable condition, ghastly for his own eyes to behold. “I was almost all gore.”

Immediately he recognized Jesus, the King of Kings, the Rescuer, the Deliverer.

[Savior? Cross? Atonement? Forgiven sin?]

“His arms reached down and touched me and everything healed up and came back together,” he recalls. “He filled me with a love I never knew existed.”

Then he picked up Howard, like one football player picking up a fallen teammate on the field, put his arms around him, and Howard cried like a baby in His arms. “He carried me out of there and we headed to where God lives.”[Is God somebody different from Jesus?]In his mind, Howard began to think that Jesus made a terrible mistake. “I’m garbage and I don’t belong in heaven,” he thought.

They stopped moving, and both Howard and Jesus were hanging in space, somewhere between heaven and hell. “We don’t make mistakes,” Jesus said tenderly.

[Cross? Atonement? Repentance?]

“He could read everything in my mind and put His voice into my head,” Howard recalls. “We had very rapid, instantaneous conversations.”

Then Jesus told Howard He had angels who would show him his life. “It was a terrible experience because my life deteriorated after adolescence. I saw I became a selfish, unloving person. I was successful, a full tenured art professor at 27, the department head, but I was a jerk.”

In this replay, he saw his heavy drinking and adultery. “I cheated on my wife proudly. It was horrible.”

...For the first time he realized the way he lived his life hurt Jesus. “I was in the arms of the most wonderful, holy, loving, kind person and we’re looking at this stuff. Embarrassing doesn’t even begin to describe it.”

As they watched together, Howard could see the pain and disappointment on the face of Jesus. “When I did these things it was like sticking a knife into his heart.”

“Do you have any questions?” Jesus asked.

“I have a million questions,” Howard replied, and proceeded to unburden himself of anything and everything he could imagine asking an omniscient being. Jesus answered Howard’s questions kindly and patiently.

When Howard couldn’t think of anything else to ask, he said, “I’m ready to go to heaven now.”

“You’re not going to heaven. You’re going back to the world,” Jesus replied.

Howard began to argue, but it was to no avail. Jesus told him to go back and live his life differently.

[Forgiven? Under the blood? Through the cross? Or just through his own will?]

...At 9:00 p.m., Howard was back in his hospital room...Less than 30 minutes had elapsed since he lost consciousness.

...When his strength returned, Howard began to devour the Bible. “Since none of my atheist friends believed me, I started memorizing verses and I would give them Bible lectures, but that didn’t go over very well,” he recalls.

He grew “desperate” for fellowship in a church, and began to attend Christ Church in Fort Thomas, Kentucky, part of United Church of Christ.

...He also wrote a book about his experience, “My Descent Into Death,” which he says was written primarily to non-believers.

Howard and his second wife, Marcia, a strong Christian, are both involved in missionary work in Belize. He maintains a passion for painting, with much of his art devoted to spiritual themes.

[Why couldn't Jesus help him strengthen his first marriage, why didn't He convert his wife? Jesus said God hates divorce.]

I just encountered this story on another blog and realized I had to write about it although I don't yet know enough about it to say more than ask the questions I've raised in the brackets. I think that's enough to show that it's just another bogus demon-inspired deception of course, but it always helps to get more evidence.

apology

OK, I'm apologizing for falling into extreme rhetoric at times and calling arguments stupid. There's no excuse for losing it like that. I apologize and pray it won't happen again.

The Harbinger again. Or why I am defending it.

Been listening to Brannon Howse's latest radio shows on The Harbinger, in which he's interviewing David James, whose book critical of The Harbinger has just come out (I'm waiting for it to arrive), and T. A. McMahon who published James' critique. It's all more of the same, but the book should be the definitive treatment of the critics' views so I'm looking forward to it in an odd sort of way.

On the morning of 9/11 I had a dream about being in the back seat of a small plane and demanding to be let out because I had a forboding about ... something. The pilot was a little girl and some time before 9/11 there had been a big story in the news about a father who let his eight-year-old daughter fly his plane alone. Sadly she crashed the plane and died. At the very least in my dream I assume she would have represented the threat of a crash. There was a man in the front passenger/co-pilot seat, however, who supposedly could have saved us, but I still wanted out. He shook his head disapprovingly at me. I was on the ground watching them fly away when I woke up to the news that the first WTC building had been hit. I was watching the TV when the other was hit.

I'm not going to say that was a prophetic dream but it's sure suggestive of something in that direction.

It has nothing to do with the dream as far as I know, but I recognized that 9/11 was God's judgment when it happened. I don't know how others could fail to recognize it. Or I've more or less figured out how, but it's still astonishing to me. Getting others to take it seriously was just about impossible. I'd talk about it on political internet forums and even conservative blogs and get denounced for it. By people who consider themselves Christians as much as by anyone else. Some Christians still aren't sure that was God's judgment or that America is under God's judgment at all. David James for one according to some things he's said.

I remember a "humorous" picture being sent around the conservative circuits of a supposed plan for a rebuilt World Trade Center, with five buildings side by side, the buildings on the ends the shortest the two next to them a bit taller and the one in the middle quite tall. All intended to show defiance to our enemies but I knew it really meant "giving the finger" to God, not just our enemies. Which is exactly the same attitude that the harbingers of Isaiah 9:10 are all about. Did anybody want to hear that? Few then for sure, I wonder how many now.

What happened to the America whose leaders would on occasions of crisis or threat call for a national time of fasting and prayer for God's forgiveness and protection? Long gone. We couldn't muster a National Christian Anything any more. If Christians these days are going to act on behalf of the nation it's going to be in spite of the nation's leadership -- though no doubt with an exception here and there in the lower ranks. We certainly don't need all the ecumenical stuff that includes the false religions, the Mormons, the Muslims, the Catholics. (Yes, the Catholics.) The crew that Glenn Beck is trying to pull together on behalf of his Mormon view of America. Much the same motley crew that Bush assembled in the National Cathedral to pray for the nation after 9/11. That set off my alarm bells for sure. That's like ASKING for further judgment against us.

At the time my impression was that a huge majority of American preachers were refusing to accept that 9/11 was God's judgment. Remember how the very few who did know it was judgment got hooted down? Like Robertson and Falwell. Wilkerson preached on it too, though as far as I recall I don't think he got attacked for it. None of these guys are among my own Christian favorites, and I have some specific theological problems with a couple of them too, but they knew what ALL the preachers in the nation should have known and didn't.

When I first learned about the Harbinger at the beginning of this year, it occurred to me that this could be God's way of making Christians notice that 9/11 was His judgment after all. It seems to be making quite a bit of headway in that direction, but it's also stirred up quite a hornet's nest among some ministries against it, not for its message of judgment though it has the effect of derailing that message anyway. For no good reason either, as I've been arguing here. Of course they think their reasons are damning and I'm not going to say they're not sincere, I'm sure they are quite convinced they are right.

Again the message of judgment comes from an outpost of the Church that wouldn't be among my favorites, but God didn't ask me. If David Wilkerson were still alive he'd no doubt recognize the truth of The Harbinger. Jerry Falwell might too. Pat Robertson has recognized it. There are some conservative evangelicals who are recognizing it as well.

God often doesn't do things the way we think He should.

God's will be done.

Glenn Beck's Ecumenical Travesty and the true Christian founding of early America

I wish Chris Pinto would write a book or somebody would write one using his material. We need his correctives to American history to sort out what was Christian in our history and what was not, and the historical perspectives he's dug up that show the REAL dimensions of the Antichrist Church of Rome. Pinto not a historian, as he's made clear, but a documentarian who accumulates his historical facts in the service of his films. We are starved for historical truth, thanks to such deceitful "histories" as David Barton has fed us over the last few decades, so historian or not Pinto's work is much needed.

Today's radio show, Restoring Love or Blind Delusion? is about Glenn Beck's latest attempt to blur the lines between Christianity and Mormonism and all other religions, his "Restoring Love" rally. Early colonial Governor John Winthrop was apparently made an excuse for Beck's ecumenical travesty, as the love he wrote of in his Model of Christian Charity is misused by Beck to foster acceptance of all religious beliefs as equal, whereas of course as a true Christian Winthrop would never have treated anything but the Biblical gospel as the true Christian faith, certainly not the false religion of Mormonism -- or Catholicism, or Islam etc. etc. etc. Pinto shows the antichrist nature of Beck's selective quoting of Winthrop.

Since I've been defending The Harbinger recently, I noticed that the Winthrop article has implications for this purpose. The book is often criticized for claiming that America is in covenant with God, or for supposedly equating the American covenant with God's covenant with ancient Israel.* Well, here is John Winthrop's affirmation that he did indeed believe "we are entered into covenant with" God and he does base it on God's covenant with Israel and the Mosaic law. Here is the last part of Winthrop's A Model of Christian Charity which refers to this covenant:

Thus stands the cause between God and us. We are entered into covenant with Him for this work. We have taken out a commission. The Lord hath given us leave to draw our own articles. We have professed to enterprise these and those accounts, upon these and those ends. We have hereupon besought Him of favor and blessing. Now if the Lord shall please to hear us, and bring us in peace to the place we desire, then hath He ratified this covenant and sealed our commission, and will expect a strict performance of the articles contained in it; but if we shall neglect the observation of these articles which are the ends we have propounded, and, dissembling with our God, shall fall to embrace this present world and prosecute our carnal intentions, seeking great things for ourselves and our posterity, the Lord will surely break out in wrath against us, and be revenged of such a people, and make us know the price of the breach of such a covenant.

Now the only way to avoid this shipwreck, and to provide for our posterity, is to follow the counsel of Micah, to do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly with our God. For this end, we must be knit together, in this work, as one man. We must entertain each other in brotherly affection. We must be willing to abridge ourselves of our superfluities, for the supply of others’ necessities. We must uphold a familiar commerce together in all meekness, gentleness, patience and liberality. We must delight in each other; make others’ conditions our own; rejoice together, mourn together, labor and suffer together, always having before our eyes our commission and community in the work, as members of the same body. So shall we keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. The Lord will be our God, and delight to dwell among us, as His own people, and will command a blessing upon us in all our ways, so that we shall see much more of His wisdom, power, goodness and truth, than formerly we have been acquainted with. We shall find that the God of Israel is among us, when ten of us shall be able to resist a thousand of our enemies; when He shall make us a praise and glory that men shall say of succeeding plantations, "may the Lord make it like that of New England." For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us. So that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so cause Him to withdraw His present help from us, we shall be made a story and a by-word through the world. We shall open the mouths of enemies to speak evil of the ways of God, and all professors for God's sake. We shall shame the faces of many of God's worthy servants, and cause their prayers to be turned into curses upon us till we be consumed out of the good land whither we are going.

And to shut this discourse with that exhortation of Moses, that faithful servant of the Lord, in his last farewell to Israel, Deut. 30. "Beloved, there is now set before us life and death, good and evil," in that we are commanded this day to love the Lord our God, and to love one another, to walk in his ways and to keep his Commandments and his ordinance and his laws, and the articles of our Covenant with Him, that we may live and be multiplied, and that the Lord our God may bless us in the land whither we go to possess it. But if our hearts shall turn away, so that we will not obey, but shall be seduced, and worship other Gods, our pleasure and profits, and serve them; it is propounded unto us this day, we shall surely perish out of the good land whither we pass over this vast sea to possess it.

Tomorrow's show, more revelations of the true nature of America's founders, who were far from the spirit of the Christian colonial leaders of 150 years earlier: Jefferson was a racist and intentionally excluded blacks from the phrase "all men are created equal."

===========
*The Harbinger doesn't say that America is "in covenant" with God though there is definitely a special relationship with God implied. But since the critics keep accusing Cahn of making some kind of equation between America and ancient Israel's covenant with God, it seems to me, based on the Winthrop statement in preparation to found a colony in America, that if Cahn had actually made such an equation he wouldn't have been wrong, so the critics' complaints don't hold either way.

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!

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.