In Dr. Thomas Ice’s
“A Critical Look At
The Harbinger” he
states that Jonathan
Cahn
“appears to be a
strongly committed
Christian and
zealous in his work
for the Lord.”
This mention
is appreciated and
is an example of
civility and respect
which is not always
so apparent in some
of the attacks
launched against The
Harbinger in recent
days.
It is also
one of the few parts
of the article I can
agree with.
But before
going onto that, I
want to return the
recognition to note
that I believe Ice
is also a strongly
committed believer,
sincere, and zealous
for the Lord and for
His coming.
I don’t know
a lot about his
work, but I’m sure I
would respect it.
We are all on
the same side in
seeking to advance
the Lord’s kingdom
in light of His
return.
But sincere
believers and
teachers can also
misunderstand,
misperceive, and
make major errors in
their assessments.
This is the
case here as it has
been with a number
of others.
COVENANTS
& QUOTES THAT ARE
NEVER THERE
Ice begins by
stating:
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.”
This charge
represents the
foundation of Ice’s
critique.
It was the
same charge that
represents the
foundation of
T.A.McMahon’s attack
in The Berean Call
and the writer,
David James.
It only has
one problem –
It’s false.
It is
telling that with
such claims being
made, no one ever
cites a quote that
actually shows The
Harbinger actually
saying this.
The reason is
simple – It never
does. The quote
doesn’t exist.
Rather, Ice’s
assumption, and that
of some others, are
based on passages in
The Harbinger along
different lines:
“Israel
was unique among
nations in that it
was conceived and
dedicated at its foundation
for the purposes of
God…But there was
one other—a civilization also
conceived and
dedicated to the
will of God from its
conception, America.”
Being
“conceived and
dedicated to God’s
purposes” at its
foundation is one
thing.
Being
“in covenant
relation with God”
is something quite
entirely else.
If I dedicate
my car to God and to
the fulfilling of
God’s purposes, does
that mean my car
is now in covenant
with God?
Of course
not.
Further, what
is stated in The
Harbinger on this
point concerns to
the actions of man,
not God.
A little
further on, Ice
states that
regardless of what
America’s Puritan
founders did,
it does not mean
that God recognizes
such nations as
being in a
covenantal relationship
like Israel.
I agree.
The only
problem is The
Harbinger never
claims that God
recognizes America
as being in a
covenantal
relationship like
Israel.
In fact, I
would go farther
than that.
The Harbinger
never states that
America is in any
covenantal
relationship with
God, whether like
Israel or not like
Israel.
So what is
the assumption based
on?
Ice writes:
“’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.’”
I’ve seen
this quoted as the
proof text that The
Harbinger is
declaring that
America is in
covenant with God,
but note what the
quote is
actually saying.
“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.”
Seeking to establish
a new nation after
the pattern of
Israel doesn’t make
that new nation
become
Israel.
And seeing a
nation in covenant
with God, doesn’t
make a nation in
covenant with God –
certainly not from
God’s end.
I’ve actually
heard two of those
who have attacked
The Harbinger say
over the airwaves
that the above
statement is
dangerous.
Amazing.
The above
statement isn’t even
a doctrinal one.
It’s American
History 101 – basic,
foundational
history.
I would have
expected discernment
ministries to have
the discernment to
discern the
distinction, rather
than seeing
historical
statements as now
being
dangerous.
JEWISH CHRISTIAN
SUPERCESSIONIST
RABBIS
OR:
HOW TO
REPLACE MYSELF… WITH
MYSELF
Ice goes on to
write:
“Amazingly,
the Jewish Christian
Rabbi, Jonathan Cahn
is advocating a form
of replacement
theology by
presenting America
as a “a new Israel.”
Yes that
would be amazing –
if it were actually
true.
But since
it’s not, the only
amazing thing is how
such charges can be
made.
Why is there
no quote cited from
The Harbinger
that actually says
that God has
replaced Israel?
You guessed
it –
because it doesn’t
exist.
The Harbinger
never says any such
thing.
How could I possibly
believe in
replacement
theology?
As a Jewish
believer, I’d have
to replace myself…
with myself!
The
congregation I lead
is called Beth
Israel.
Our
ministry
headquarters is
called the
Jerusalem
Center.
We preach
against replacement
theology all the
time.
This charge
and the fact that
others have sought
to use this as well
gives the reader a
little example of
just how baseless
the attacks against
The Harbinger
have been.
WHAT THE HARBINGER
ACTUALLY DOES SAY
ABOUT ALL THIS
The reason The
Harbinger includes
these
historical
statements
concerning America’s
establishment after
the pattern of
ancient Israel is
that it forms a
striking backdrop in
view of what the
book is about to
reveal, that we are
now experiencing the
pattern of Israel’s
warnings and
judgment.
The book does
mention that in
America’s striving
after its founding
Christian ideals, it
has been blessed,
just as
righteousness exalts
a nation.
As to whether
God has honored the
dedication and
consecration of its
founders and, if so,
to what degree, and
in what matter, are
left as open
questions.
And despite
what Dr. Ice
believes, the
revelations
presented in The
Harbinger concerning
the manifestation of
the signs and
patterns of ancient
Israel’s last days
exist independently
of how one answers
such questions.
Thus, this entire
series of objections
made against The
Harbinger prove, in
the end, to be as
baseless and
nonexistent as the
quotes which are
never quoted.
ISAIAH,
AMERICA, & MORE
NONEXISTENT QUOTES
Dr. Ice writes:
“Rabbi Cahn
claims that Isaiah
9:10 also is a
prophecy about
contemporary
America.
No, Rabbi Cahn does
not.
And this is
another example of
confusion and the
resulting confused
attacks concerning
The Harbinger.
I understand
it, but it remains a
mistake.
The Harbinger
certainly speaks of
an ancient mystery
that lies behind
what is now
happening in
America.
But the
mystery is that of
judgment and an
ancient biblical
template in which
that judgment
progresses.
The
resurfacing of these
manifestations, the
replaying of this
progression, and the
appearance of these
specific signs as
warnings of
judgment, are light
years removed from
saying that Isaiah
prophesied of
them concerning
America.
Dr. Ice has
confused it as have
a number of his
associates.
So we must
come to the
question: Why is it
that there isn’t one
quote cited from all
of the pages in The
Harbinger, that
simply says that
Isaiah was
prophesying of
America?
Yes, you
guessed it again –
because it doesn’t
exist.
The Harbinger
never says that.
And yet The
Harbinger actually
does state the
distinction in the
very first chapter
that introduces the
Scripture:
“The
prophecy, in its
context, concerned
ancient Israel. But
now, as a sign,
it concerns
America.”
The prophecy is
given to Israel.
But it forms
a template and
pattern through
which God may bring
judgment, and a
progression of signs
given to give
warning.
‘IF MY PEOPLE’
- NO
APPLICATION?
Ice writes:
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
He then goes into a
section to prove
that the Scripture
is given to Israel.
The only
error compounded
here is that of
assumption.
Yes, we know
the Scripture is
about Israel.
But without
even getting into
Ice’s assertion that
Scriptures can only
have one meaning –
are we now saying
that Scriptures can
never be applied
outside the borders
of Israel?
Or that God
cannot speak to us
through Scriptures
which, in the Bible,
concern others?
How about
“The Lord is my
Shepherd,” or “I
call you friends.”
Of course He
can.
And the
central point here
is that God gives
hope to a people who
have turned away
from him, that if
they repent and seek
His face, if they
come before Him in
prayer and turn from
sin, He is there to
hear from Heaven in
compassion and mercy
and to bring healing
to a land.
Many
believers throughout
the nation believe
that this very word,
is crucial for this
hour – not because
of any assertion
that its context is
America, but that
its overall
principles are both
applicable and
crucial for
America’s future.
REPENT ANYWAY (JUST
NOT BECAUSE OF THE
HARBINGER)
As to “the delusion”
that some kind of
revelation has been
given, nothing here
is claimed except
that God gives
insight to all His
children who are to
both study the
Scriptures and be
aware concerning the
signs of the time.
Ice adds that
Americans do indeed
need to repent, but
we shouldn’t believe
that on the basis of
The Harbinger saying
it.
So Ice agrees
with the overall
call and thrust of
The Harbinger but
doesn’t want others
to agree with it
because The
Harbinger is saying
it.
People should
believe the need to
repent because of
the Bible.
The Harbinger
rather is giving
what most people are
calling a stunning
and urgent
revelation into the
signs of the times.
Should we be
upset that people
are getting the
message about
repentance?
Or should we
rejoice in it?
THE HARBINGER
PHENOMENA
I’ve watched in
amazement as The
Harbinger has become
a national
phenomenon.
Most are
describing it’s
revelations as
stunning,
mind-boggling,
amazing.
It has been
endorsed and praised
all across the
evangelical world,
from pastors,
ministry leaders,
Bible teachers
(extending into
theological
seminaries, and
departments of
biblical
hermeneutics and Old
Testament studies),
and believers
of all denominations
from Baptist to
Charismatic, from
Pat Boone to Pat
Robertson.
The fruit of
The Harbinger’s
message is that
people across
America
are seeing the
urgent need for
repentance, and
are repenting,
and
are coming to
salvation, and
are seeking God
and praying
fervently for this
nation.
At the same time,
I’ve been amazed as
well to see a number
of ministers come
against it on
completely erroneous
and often mutually
contradictory
grounds.
Strange also
is the bizarre
nature of many of
these.
That Dr.
Ice’s critique
misses the point as
much as the rest is
disappointing.
None of its
central three
objections:
A) that it
claims a covenant
between God and
America
B) that it
supports replacement
theology
C) that it
states that Isaiah
was prophesying of
America – hold up or
apply.
At the same
time I know that
something like The
Harbinger could not
come without
opposition – whether
hostile or
well-meaning.
One blog I
came across on the
web asked this
question.
‘The
strangeness of the
attacks against The
Harbinger has to
make you
wonder what
the devil has
against it?’
For this reason
alone, on top of
every other reason,
the reader would do
well to find out the
answer to that
question for his or
herself.
And the
trumpet will
continue to sound.