to go deeper into the mysteries.‖6 Clearly, Cahn believes that the harbingers he sees in Isaiah
9:10 are genuine and constitute a crucial message for his nation.
And many agree. The Harbinger has been enthusiastically received by many who are
convinced that the harbingers are not just the product of imagination but are an accurate
understanding of what the Bible teaches in this passage. Steve Strang, for example, whose
company published the book, writes
―Rabbi Cahn‘s best-selling book, The Harbinger, has served as a national wake-up
call. Through its narrative, he connected the dots for us to see that God is warning
America in the same ways He warned Israel in Isaiah‘s day through prophecies and
harbingers of things to come!...I believe it is a game-changer in and for America.‖7
If Cahn has indeed discovered ancient ―mysteries‖ in Isaiah 9:10 that constitute a
prophetic warning for America, then its significance can hardly be overstated. However, the
magnitude of the stakes makes it of prime importance to ―Test all things; hold fast what is
good‖ (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Cahn‘s claims must be rigorously analyzed and found to be
valid before they can be accepted and disseminated, and such an analysis is what we shall
now do. Since the fictional framing device is immaterial to this analysis, we shall look at
Cahn‘s claims as put forth in his DVD, ―The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment: Is there an Ancient
Mystery that Foretells America‘s Future?‖
6 “A Q&A with Jonathan Cahn,” sidebar to ibid. p.20
7 Strang, Steve. “Bearing the Good Word for America: the supernatural story of how The Harbinger found its
way to the nation.” Ministry Today 31:2 (March/April 2013), p.14
THE ANALYSIS
A SUMMARY OF CAHN‟S CLAIMS:
Cahn‘s case centres on the words of the prophet Isaiah, in Isaiah 9:10, shown below in
context, with verse 10 bolded:
The Lord sent a word against Jacob, and it has fallen on Israel. All the
people will know—Ephraim and the inhabitant of Samaria—who say
in pride and arrogance of heart:
“The bricks have fallen down,
But we will rebuild with hewn stones;
The sycamores are cut down,
But we will replace them with cedars.”
Therefore the Lord shall set up the adversaries of Rezin against him,
and spur his enemies on, the Syrians before and the Philistines behind;
and they shall devour Israel with an open mouth. (Isaiah 9:8-12a)
The background to this text is found in 2 Kings 16 and 17. In 732 BC, Pekah, king of the
northern kingdom of Israel, formed an alliance with Rezin, king of the pagan nation of Aram,
in order to attack the southern kingdom of Judah. In response, Ahaz, king of Judah, appealed
to Assyria, the superpower of the day, for help, paying tribute to the Assyrian king, Tiglath-
Pileser. Accordingly, Assyria attacked and sacked Damascus and Israel, and annexed Aram
and parts of Israel, including the territory of Reuben and Gad, as well as Manasseh‘s territory
in Gilead and Naphtali. Israel responded to this setback with ―pride and arrogance of heart,‖
as described in Isaiah 9:9, and then in 721 BC, the Assyrians returned and conquered what
was left of Israel and deported the population into captivity.
Cahn asserts that
• Isaiah 9:10 was a pronouncement of doom to Israel unless they repent
• There are nine ―harbingers‖ (signs that warn of coming judgment) in Isaiah 9:10
• These harbingers have been repeated in the recent history of the United States as a ―first
shaking.‖
• Since the U.S. has not turned back to God, they have been given a ―second shaking.‖
• If America does not repent, she will face God‘s judgment, just as Israel did in ancient
times
It should be noted that Cahn rightly does not say that Isaiah 9:10 is a prophecy about
America; it is clearly a pronouncement of doom against ancient Israel which came to pass in
721 BC. He does, however, say that there is a prophetic warning for America in Isaiah 9:10,
in the form of the nine harbingers. This idea rests on the following two pillars:
• America, like Israel, was founded for God‘s purposes, and turned away from Him to
idols. God is calling America back as He did Israel.
• Isaiah 9:10 is programmatic of how God deals with rebellious nations; in other words,
there is a specific pattern of events, or harbingers, that is followed as God moves from
warning to final judgment. According to Cahn, there are nine such ―harbingers that can
be discerned in Isaiah 9:10. Since these are programmatic, it is of crucial importance to
note, says Cahn, that ―all the components of Isaiah 9:10, all the harbingers of Israel‘s last
days before destruction have been manifested to America…in precision, in exactness,‖8
and, he continues, ―It happened because it had to happen; the harbinger had to manifest.‖
The nine harbingers Cahn identifies are the following:
The First Harbinger: The Breach
The Second Harbinger: The Terrorist
The Third Harbinger: The Bricks
The Fourth Harbinger: The Tower
The Fifth Harbinger: The Gazit Stone
The Sixth Harbinger: The Sycamore
The Seventh Harbinger: The Erez Tree
The Eighth Harbinger: The Utterance
The Ninth Harbinger: The Prophecy
Only four of these items are explicitly mentioned in Isaiah 9:10, viz. bricks, hewn (gazit)
stones, sycamores, and cedar (erez) trees. The verse itself can be taken as ―the utterance.‖
That leaves four that are not mentioned, but Cahn makes a case for each of them. Let us now
look at Cahn‘s explanation of each of these ―harbingers.‖
The First Harbinger: THE BREACH
According to Cahn, the first harbinger is the ―breach of a nation‘s hedge of protection.‖ God
had put a hedge of protection around ancient Israel and around America much later, and until
that hedge is removed, the nation is ―almost impenetrable.‖ But because of the nation‘s sin,
God removes this hedge of protection and allows the enemy in, leading to an “initial
strike on the land.” This initial strike is limited in scope and temporary in duration, but it
is a warning: final destruction will follow if the nation does not repent: “That first strike
is only temporary, but it‟s a warning of the, of the final destruction that will come if that
nation does not turn back.” In the case of America, that ―initial strike‖ was the 9/11
terrorist attack on the World Trade Center that killed brought down the twin towers and killed
almost 3,000 people.
8 Unless otherwise stated, the quotations are my transcriptions from Cahn’s ““The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment: Is
there an Ancient Mystery that Foretells America’s Future?”
The Second Harbinger: THE TERRORIST
According to Cahn, ―the second harbinger manifests as the sign of the terrorist.‖ The
Assyrians who attacked ancient Israel, he maintains, were terrorists, ―brutal, violent, vicious
people….the Nazis of the ancient world.‖ In fact, Cahn says, they gave to the world ―the gift
of terrorism. The Assyrians are the fathers of terrorism, he says. They invented it, they
created it, they mastered it, they perfected it, which is to use terror as a strategy to accomplish
an end.‖ Cahn‘s basis for this assertion is that the Assyrian armies used to attack, mutilate,
and torture civilians as a means to convince their enemies to surrender without a fight. Cahn
then reminds us that this is the exact strategy of Al-Qaeda.
Just as ancient Israel was attacked by terrorists, then, so too was America. And, to make
the parallel even closer, Cahn points out that ―U.S. soldiers undoubtedly came into contact
with actual descendents of the ancient Assyrians of Isaiah 9:10‖ when they went to war in
Iraq.
The Third Harbinger: THE BRICKS
Isaiah 9:10a makes mention that ―The bricks have fallen down,‖ a vivid image of the
destruction wrought upon Israel by the Assyrian attack. In the same way, bricks actually fell
down when the World Trade Center towers collapsed. According to Cahn, fallen bricks were
the ―central image‖ of the 9/11 attack.
The Fourth Harbinger: THE TOWER
While there is no mention of a tower in the Hebrew text of Isaiah 9:10, the Septuagint (LXX),
the ancient Greek translation widely in use among Jews of the Diaspora during Jesus‘ time,
reads, ―The bricks are fallen down, but come, let us hew stones, and cut down sycamores and
cedars, and let us build for ourselves a tower.‖ This is an attitude of defiance, says Cahn, is
being directly replicated by America, who is actually building a new tower, the Freedom
Tower, at Ground Zero.
The Fifth Harbinger: THE GAZIT STONE
The ancient Israelites reacted to the fallen bricks not with repentance but with a determination
to ―rebuild with hewn (Hebrew: gazit) stones.‖ America is doing precisely the same thing: a
hewn block of granite was laid on July 4, 2004, as the cornerstone for the Freedom Tower.
This gazit stone, Cahn says, ―becomes a symbol of defiance.‖
The Sixth Harbinger: THE SYCAMORE
Isaiah 9:10b records the Israelites saying after the Assyrian attack that ―the sycamores are
cut down, but we will replace them with cedars.‖ Cahn insists, therefore, that the sycamore is
a harbinger. “A sycamore must be struck down and must be connected with the [9/11]
attack,” he avers. And that did, in fact, happen; an ancient tree in a church yard near the
World Trade Center was cut down by flying debris when the buildings collapsed – and that
ancient tree was a sycamore.
―The sign of national judgment, the sycamore has fallen right in order,‖ says Cahn. He
continues, ―New Yorkers come to see the sycamore without realizing that it is an ancient
harbinger of judgment. The harbinger of the sycamore appears in America, the sign of
uprooting for a nation – the sixth harbinger.‖
The Seventh Harbinger: THE EREZ TREE
The ancient Israelites had insisted they would recover from the Assyrian attack as a better
and stronger nation, insisting that ―The sycamores are cut down, but we will replace them
with cedars‖ (Isaiah 9:10b). This, too, is a harbinger, according to Cahn, and this, too, was
fulfilled in America. Three years after the terrorist attack9, a Norway spruce tree was planted
in the exact spot in which the sycamore had once stood, at the corner of Ground Zero.
9 It was actually a bit more than two years later, being planted on November 26, 2003.
Here there seems to be a problem for Cahn, as this tree was a Norway spruce, not a cedar.
However, Cahn reveals that the relevant word in Isaiah 9:10 is ―in English cedar, but in
Hebrew erez, which can mean cedar, but it specifically means more than ‗cedar.‘ It means a
conifer tree…The most accurate translation of erez…is the word pinaceae, a pinaceae tree, a
tree of the pinaceae family.‖ The cedar of Lebanon is a member of the pinaceae family of
trees, points out Cahn, and so is the Norway spruce.
On this basis, then, Cahn maintains that the erez tree harbinger has been manifested in
America. He says, ―All these things manifesting, the sixth and seventh harbinger together,
and nobody is planning this out, nobody is, is figuring it out, nobody‘s saying, ‗Let‘s do this
with this‘; it‘s just happening. As with the rest of the harbingers, they happened because they
have to happen, they have to be manifest. So now, in order, even the seventh harbinger is
manifested, at the corner of Ground Zero.‖
The Eighth Harbinger: THE UTTERANCE
In Isaiah 9:10, ancient Israel defied God by vowing to rebuild after the Assyrian attack.
Accordingly, says Cahn, ―for the eighth harbinger to manifest in America, what has to
happen is that an American leader, or prominent American leader, would have to
proclaim these words of defiance in a public setting in the capital city.‖ The prominent
American leader he finds is Senator John Edwards, who actually quoted Isaiah 9:10 on
September 11, 2004, while addressing the Congressional Black Caucus Prayer Breakfast:
Cahn opines that ―It‘s mind boggling, it‘s amazing that he would say this. He doesn‘t
realize ‘cause no one would say this if they knew what it was…he proclaims it without
knowing it. He‟s uttering the vow and he‟s now making the ancient vow, he‟s
transforming it now into America‟s vow, which is ominous because that vow was sealing
the fate of ancient Israel for destruction. So the eighth harbinger, the vow, the utterance,
is manifested in Washington D.C.‖
The Ninth Harbinger: THE PROPHECY
Following the initial Assyrian attack in 732 BC, Israel did not repent but instead defied God
by vowing to rebuild, and according to Cahn the ninth harbinger consists of this ancient vow
being spoken prophetically. He says, ―The ninth harbinger is the vow in the form of
prophecy or ‗The Prophecy‘…the vow, the ancient vow, is to be proclaimed in America by
an American leader in the capital city, and it‘s proclaimed prophetically in advance of
what is about to happen. It‟s gonna foretell the course of America before it happens and
it‟s gonna become part of the national record.‖
Cahn continues: ―The vow of the ancient leaders of Israel was also prophetic because
they were speaking what would happen. They were foretelling the nation‟s course of
defiance and judgment and it becomes part of the prophetic record of the Bible, because
Isaiah quotes it as a comment on it from God‘s judgment on the vow, so it also becomes a
prophetic utterance in that respect. What leader in their right mind would do this,
proclaiming judgment on America? But the amazing thing is, it happened.”
Cahn avers that ―On the day after 9/11, in the capital city, on Capitol Hill, a national
leader, a very high national leader, the senate majority leader Tom Daschle – he is the one
who‘s appointed to bring America‘s response to 9/11…This is the official response of
America to 9/11.‖ And that response, says Cahn, is the very vow of defiance in Isaiah 9:10.
And this indeed becomes part of the ―national record‖ of America, via the Congressional
Record, says Cahn:
―How could this possibly become our response?‖ asks Cahn, and then he answers: ―It
happened because it had to happen. The harbinger had to manifest and so it did, on the
very day after the calamity: the ninth harbinger. All nine harbingers manifested in
precision, in exactness, harbingers of judgment.‖
So that is Cahn‘s case for the nine harbingers that were manifested in ancient Israel
according to Isaiah 9:10 and are now being manifested in America. But that is not the end
of the matter; the nine harbingers are followed by what Cahn calls “the second
shaking.” We now turn our attention to this following phenomenon.
THE SECOND SHAKING
America chose defiance rather than repentance, says Cahn, and―without repentence [sic]
there comes a second shaking.‖ Cahn calls this “The Isaiah 9:10 Effect,” which he defines
thus: ―
“The attempt of a nation to defy the course of its judgment apart
from repentance will instead set in motion a chain of events that
will bring about the very calamity it seeks to avert.”
Therefore, says Cahn, ―the mysteries of the harbingers are gonna continue and they‘re gonna
produce a second American calamity. The Isaiah 9:10 effect: there‘s gonna be a second
shaking…that‟s gonna touch America in its economic power, its financial foundation. The
mystery of ancient Israel is now gonna replay in modern America.‖
Cahn then begins to outline the economic consequences of the ―War on Terror‖:
A cost to date of $993.5 billion dollars
Skyrocketing oil prices
A massive federal debt of $1.3 trillion dollars
Cahn continues: ―All these things which will hurt America, it‘ll be another manifestation
of this Isaiah 9:10 effect that‟s gonna bring about the collapse of the American
economy, and it happened just a few days after 9/11…America‘s first action of ―We will
rebuild‖…It starts in extreme slashing of the nation‘s interest rates.‖
This leads to ―easy money‖ and unprecedented lending, says Cahn, which leads to ―risky
loans‖ and the housing bubble; ―This is the Isaiah 9:10 effect.‖ According to Cahn, ―It all
goes back to 9/11.‖
Then comes the great stock market crash of September 2008. Cahn‘s comments on this
are as follows:
• At this point, ―the American economy crashes.‖
• It is ―the greatest economic disaster since the great depression‖
• The Biblical principle operating here is: ―If one manifestation of divine anger is
resisted, another must be found.‖
• The result: ―This collapse that comes on the American economy weakens the
American economy and hastens the end of the era of America‘s reign over the
economic global order.‖
• It is caused by the fall of Lehman Brothers on September 12, 2008 – 7 years after the
utterance of the ―vow‖
Next, Cahn cites Ezekiel 13:14, which reads, ―So I will break down the wall you have
plastered with untempered mortar, and bring it down to the ground so its foundation will be
exposed.‖ Now, if one sign of judgment is ―laying bare the foundation,‖ asks Cahn, what is
the foundation of the United States that could be laid bare and linked to 9/11? His answer is
that the ―foundation‖ is that in which the nation trusts: its economic power. And where is
the heart of America‘s economic power?
New York City, says Cahn. Specifically, it‘s Lower Manhattan. And, in particular, it is
Wall Street.
And now Cahn points out yet another noteworthy parallel. The New York Stock
Exchange, founded in 1792, was originally called the Buttonwood Association and formed by
the Buttonwood Agreement. This was named after the tree under which signed the
agreement, a buttonwood tree – and the buttonwood tree is a sycamore.
THE MYSTERY OF THE SHEMITAH
Cahn now turns his attention to what he calls ―the mystery, the ancient, ancient mystery of
the shemitah.‖ The shemitah, he explains, is ―the seventh year or the Sabbath year
command.‖ (This is based on the commands to Israel in Exodus 23:10-11, Leviticus 25:1-4,
and Deuteronomy 5:1-1:
Six years you shall sow your land and gather in its produce, but the
seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow, that the poor of your
people may eat; and what they leave, the beasts of the field may eat. In
like manner you shall do with your vineyard and your olive grove. (Ex
23:10-11 cf. Lev 25:1-4)
―At the end of every seven years you shall grant a release of debts. And
this is the form of the release: Every creditor who has lent anything to
his neighbor shall release it; he shall not require it of his neighbor or
his brother, because it is called the Lord‘s release. (Deut 5:1-2).)
According to Cahn:
―The Shemitah was meant to be a blessing, but if a nation turned away
from God, the Shemitah turns from a blessing to a judgment, to a
sign of judgment. In Israel‘s history, the people would be driven from
the land and the land would rest, and God said, ‗Now the land is gonna
keep its Sabbaths or Shemitahs.‘ And so Israel was in captivity or
exiled for seventy years. Why? It was based on how many Shemitahs
they had not observed. So the Shemitah also holds the key to the
timing of the judgment on a nation.‖
Cahn tells us that ―The Sabbath year causes production to cease, labor to cease, and wipes
away the nation‘s financial accounts.‖ He argues that the economic disaster of September
2008 was just such a Shemitah judgment levied against America, as a “second shaking.” The Hebrew word ―Shemita,‖ he says, can mean ―letting fall‖ or ―letting collapse,‖ and in this
case refers to the “collapse of the American-led world order and prosperity.” He points
to an amazing parallel:
• The peak of the 2008 stock market crash came on September 29, the exact Biblical
day to release debts (29 Elul on the Hebrew calendar)
• The greatest stock market crash before that came on September 17, 2001, seven years
before, and also on 29 Elul.
THE THREE WITNESSES
Cahn insists that ―the most dramatic witness of America under judgment is the proclaiming
of the ancient vow of judgment that links America to ancient Israel, that links America to
being a nation in defiance, a nation that is being shaken and being called back to God.‖
Mindful of 2 Corinthians 13:1 – ―In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be
established‖ – Cahn wants to find two or three American leaders repeating the statement of
Isaiah 9:10. He finds the following:
Having found three such witnesses, Cahn concludes, ―The truth is confirmed; the judgment is
confirmed.‖
THE MYSTERY GROUND
Cahn‘s final point is what he calls ―the mystery ground.‖ Reminding us that King Solomon
dedicated the newly built temple and commended the Israelite nation to God in 958 BC, he
asserts that ―The final, ultimate sign of judgment was when the calamity, the destruction,
touched that temple mount, that same place where the nation had been consecrated, the
nation‘s consecration ground, its ground of prayer and its ground of dedication.‖ Cahn
believes that this is a principle, saying ―So here‟s a principle: In the days of judgment, the
calamity or the destruction touches the nation‟s ground of consecration. The nation‘s
ground of dedication to God becomes its ground of judgment.‖
Here, too, Cahn sees a parallel to the United States, saying, ―Now, America is similar to
Israel, was also founded on God‘s word. In fact, America was founded originally by the
Puritans to be a second Israel.‖ According to Cahn, America has a consecration day
corresponding to Solomon‟s dedication of the temple. It is April 30, 1789, the day on
which George Washington was inaugurated as the first president of the United States, when
America became a fully constituted nation.
Furthermore, says Cahn, Washington spoke of God‟s providence and warned against
turning away, as did Solomon. As Cahn puts it:
―Washington gave a prophetic warning in that day, that first day of
America as a nation. There is hidden or there is embedded a prophetic
message, a warning, in the first address of America‘s first President on
the first day. And he said, in effect, he said this, in effect, he spoke, he
spoke of the smiles of heaven, but what he said in effect was if
America ever turns away from God and from His ways, God would
remove His blessing from the land.‖
Cahn goes on to say that ―the first act of the American government together was not to pass a
law or to debate; it was to pray, to gather in prayer and to consecrate the nation‘s future to
God.‖
Finally, Cahn draws our attention to one more amazing parallel: the site of this
consecration. It happened in New York City. In lower Manhattan. At Ground Zero.
Specifically, it happened in St. Paul‘s Chapel, the very building on the grounds of which
grew the sycamore that was cut down in the 9/11 disaster, the very sycamore which, by
suffering the blow of the flying debris, protected the chapel from harm.
And here ends Cahn‟s case. Having sketched out in detail what he sees as a clear
warning from God, he urges his fellow Americans to heed the warning, citing the promise of
2 Chronicles 7:14: ―If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and
pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and
will forgive their sin and heal their land.‖ ―He is calling America,‖ says Cahn, ―just as He
called Nineveh.‖
THE EXAMINATION OF CAHN‟S CLAIMS
INTRODUCTION
Prime facie, Jonathan‘s case is truly impressive, and it would seem to be no wonder that so
many evangelicals have embraced it so wholeheartedly. The number of parallels he has
adduced between ancient Israel and modern America seem stunning. Surely this cannot be
coincidence; surely this is indeed a warning from God. Furthermore, evangelicals are rightly
dismayed at the path America has been taking away from its founding values for a long time
now, and if only there could be a clear warning to show the American people, a warning so
clear that it could not be ignored, then, perhaps, they would change their ways.
Nevertheless, no matter how much we may want Cahn‘s case to be true, we need to
examine it carefully. As we have already said, if Cahn has indeed discovered ―ancient
mysteries‖ in Isaiah 9:10 that constitute a warning for America, then the significance of this
can hardly be overstated. However, the magnitude of the stakes makes it of prime
importance to ―Test all things; hold fast what is good‖ (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Cahn‘s
claims must be rigorously analyzed and found to be valid before they can be accepted and
disseminated. Let us therefore proceed with this analysis.
CAHN‟S TWO PILLARS
First, recall that Cahn‘s case rests fundamentally on two pillars:
• America, like Israel, was founded for God‘s purposes, and turned away from Him. God
is calling America back as He did Israel.
• Isaiah 9:10 is programmatic of how God deals with rebellious nations. There is a specific
pattern of events, or harbingers, that is followed as God moves from warning to judging,
and this pattern is the nine harbingers Cahn identifies in Isaiah 9:10. He claims that ―all
the components of Isaiah 9:10, all the harbingers of Israel‘s last days before destruction
have been manifested to America…in precision, in exactness,‖ and says, ―it happened
because it had to happen; the harbinger had to manifest.‖
The First Pillar
The first of the ideas above is absolutely essential to Cahn‘s case. As his fictional prophet
says,
―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….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.‖10
10
Cahn, The Harbinger. op.cit., p.19
Cahn clearly believes that this is true in reality, not just in fiction. He asserts that:
―The backdrop is that of an ancient nation, founded on the Word of
God and dedicated to His purposes. Yet over time Israel begins to drift
away, departing from His ways more and more rapidly…This nation
[the United States], too, was founded upon and dedicated to God‘s
purposes. But like Israel, America has departed and is departing from
God and His ways.‖11
This parallel in foundation is absolutely necessary to explain why there would be a
parallel in the harbingers and the impending judgments between Israel and America. Cahn
therefore strives mightily to demonstrate its veracity, arguing, as we have seen, that ―America
is similar to Israel, was also founded on God‘s word. In fact, America was founded
originally by the Puritans to be a second Israel,‖ complete with its own consecration day
corresponding to Solomon‘s dedication of the temple; Washington, like a latter-day Solomon,
speaking of God‘s providence and warning against turning away; and prayer and consecration
by the new government.
For all this, however, Cahn‟s first pillar fails utterly. America is not a modern-day
Israel. Cahn seriously misses the point when he says that ―Israel was unique among nations
in that it was conceived and dedicated at its foundation for the purposes of God,‖ or that
Israel was ―founded on the Word of God and dedicated to His purposes.‖ If that‘s all it was,
then America could indeed be a parallel. But it was not simply a matter of bright, believing
minds creating a nation and dedicating it to God; Israel was a nation created by God
Himself, who entered into a covenant with them at His own initiative.
Unlike America, Israel was not a democracy that could make its own laws, subject to a
man-made constitution; she was a theocracy whose law was given to the people by God, who
required them to obey it, not change it. Nor did Israel have such a principle as ―Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof‖; on the contrary, their religion was given to them by God and the authorities were
expected to enforce it and to prohibit the free exercise of, say, the worship of Baal or Molech.
The crucial difference, however, is this: If America‘s founders did indeed proclaim a
national covenant with God, it did not create an actual covenant, since such a covenant can
only be instituted by God. Hear what He said to Israel
―For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God
has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all
the peoples on the face of the earth. The LORD did not set His love on
you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other
people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the LORD
loves you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore to
your fathers‖. (Deuteronomy 7:6-8a)
―For you are a holy people to the Lord your God, and the Lord has
chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all
the peoples who are on the face of the earth.‖ (Deuteronomy 14:2)
11
Cahn, “A National Wake-Up Call.” op.cit., p.18
The fact that the covenant between God and Israel was made at God‘s initiative, not
man‘s, runs throughout the Old Testament. So what validity, if any, would accrue to man‘s
attempt to institute a covenant between their nation and God is certainly open to question.
But it is a moot question for this issue, because, contra Cahn‟s claims, America was not
founded as a nation in covenant with God. One need only look at the two foundational
documents of the United States, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, to see
this.
What does the Declaration of Independence (above left) say about God? There are only
the following two references in the entire document:
―When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one
people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with
another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate
and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's
God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires
that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted
among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes
destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to
abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on
such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them
shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.‖
Not only are there only two references, but these two – one to ―Nature‘s God‖ and the other
to ―Creator‖ – are couched in language which is typically Deist12
, not Christian.
Furthermore, in their own words herein, the American founders make it clear that they
themselves are creating a new country; it is not coming into being through an act of God. The
founders are justifying this new nation in ―the opinions of mankind‖ rather claiming it is the
will of God. On the contrary, it is purely a human endeavour initiated by man. It is not based
on God‘s word, but, on the contrary, on ―such principles‖ and organization that seems “to
them most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.‖ The stated goal, contra Cahn‟s case,
was not to glorify God but to achieve “safety and happiness.”
Nor was the success of the nation contingent on following God but on ―such principles‖
and organizations that man in his wisdom may cleverly devise. Clearly, then, according to
the Declaration of Independence the United States is not a nation “dedicated to God‟s
purposes” in its founding, as Cahn would have it.13
This becomes clearer still when we look at the Constitution of the United States. It is
the Constitution that actually defines the ―principles‖ and organization of this nation. How
many times is God mentioned in the Constitution? Not once. Not even once. On the
contrary, the document begins:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect
Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the
Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
There is obviously no ―dedication to God‘s purposes‖ here. Antithetically, the
Constitution makes it crystal clear who is the motive force for this new nation: “We the
People.” Blessings are not the result of obedience to God‘s word; rather it is something
Americans gain for ―ourselves.‖ Good government, justice, tranquillity, protection, liberty,
success – none of these come as a result of following “God and His ways” but are gained
by Americans for themselves by means of their “Constitution,” a Constitution that
carefully omits any reference to God.
In fact, this Constitution seems to fit Cahn‟s definition of defiance rather than
dedication to God, as it based on the idea that success and liberty come first and last from
people and their cleverness – God need not even be mentioned. The Americans cut down
the sycamores of British rule and rebuilt with the cedars of their Declaration of
Independence and Constitution, bigger and better than before.
12
The popular belief among the upper classes in this era that, while there must be a God who created the world and set it in motion, he is not a personal God who intervenes any further in the operation of his world. God is necessary only as a First Cause, and after that is studiously ignored. He is the ruler, but an absent ruler. He is useful on occasion to justify claims of “Natural Law.” 13
It should also be noted that the Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson, a man who considered Biblical Christianity to be “nonsense.” If the Founders were interested in creating a “New Israel,” why did they commit the writing of their first founding document into the hands of a man who considered Biblical Christianity to be nonsense?
And regarding Washington‘s inaugural address, we need to look not at what Cahn claims
that Washington was saying ―in effect,‖ but at his actual words:
―...my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over
the Universe, who presides in the Councils of Nations, and whose
providential aids can supply every human defect, that his benediction
may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the People of the
United States, a Government instituted by themselves. In tendering this
homage to the Great Author of every public and private good I assure
myself that it expresses your sentiments not less than my own....No
People can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand,
which conducts the Affairs of men more than the People of the United
States....we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of
Heaven, can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal
rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained...‖
While this seems better than what is found in the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution, the terminology used in place of “God” is clearly Deist. And, at any rate, the
foundational principles of the United States are determined by the Declaration of
Independence and especially the Constitution, not by Washington‘s inaugural address.
Cahn‟s first pillar, then, fails utterly. There is no viable way to maintain that America
was founded as a New Israel “dedicated to God‟s purposes.”
The Second Pillar
Cahn‘s second pillar, as we‘ve seen, is that Isaiah 9:10 is programmatic of how God deals
with rebellious nations. There is a specific pattern of events, or harbingers, that is followed
as God moves from warning to judging, and this pattern comprises the nine harbingers Cahn
identifies in Isaiah 9:10. Claiming that ―all the components of Isaiah 9:10, all the harbingers
of Israel‘s last days before destruction have been manifested to America…in precision, in
exactness,‖ he asserts that ―it happened because it had to happen; the harbinger had to
manifest.‖
The obvious question that is arises is this: why should the details in Isaiah 9:10 be
considered programmatic? There are many proclamations of judgment by God against
nations in the Old Testament – and, indeed, many different proclamations against Israel and
Judah – all with different stated historical details. So why, out of all of these different
pronouncements, should this one be considered programmatic over all others, as Cahn wants?
Now, if there were an explicit statement in Scripture to that effect, say, God saying here
that ―In this manner do I deal with all defiant nations,‖ then we would indeed know that
Isaiah 9:10 is programmatic. But there is no such statement. In fact, there seems to be no
objective, independent basis for the claim that Isaiah 9:10 is programmatic; this
assertion seems to be based on nothing more than the fact that Cahn thinks he has identified a
number of parallels between the historical details in Isaiah 9:10 and what is happening in
modern-day America. And some of these ―parallels‖ seem rather tenuous, at that. Yes, the
ancient Israelites in 732 BC made a decision to replace the sycamores that had been cut down
with cedars, but does it really follow from that that every time a nation is judged, it must
involve an actual sycamore being cut down and an actual cedar being planted in its place?
The answer should be obvious.
Now, given the tenuous nature of some (or all?) of Cahn‘s ―parallels‖ between what
happened to ancient Israel and what is happening in America today, these ―parallels‖ could
be considered nothing more than interesting coincidences that have no significance if Isaiah
9:10 is just one of many judgment pronouncements, and not programmatic at all. Cahn‟s
whole case is significant if and only if Isaiah 9:10 is not just one of many judgment
pronouncements but is, in fact, programmatic; only then are these events happening in
America happening because they ―had to happen; the harbinger had to manifest.‖ It is
essential, then, to determine whether or not Isaiah 9:10 is to be seen as programmatic.
So how do we decide? In the absence of a clear word in Scripture about this matter, how
can we know whether Isaiah 9:10 is programmatic or not? The answer should be obvious: we
need to look at other cases in the Old Testament in which a covenant nation was judged,
to see whether the same “harbingers” were “manifested”. Granted, we have a very
limited data set, as there has only ever been one covenant nation in history, and that is
Israel. However, Israel split into two kingdoms in 931 BC, as previously mentioned, and
Isaiah 9:10 describes the judgement of one of these, the northern kingdom of Israel. So there
is one other example we can look at: the southern kingdom of Judah. And, while one
example isn‘t enough to establish a pattern, it is enough to disprove a pattern should this
other example differ.
Now, the southern kingdom of Judah was subjugated by the Babylonians around 606 BC,
and then later destroyed by them in 586 BC. The account is told in 2 Kings 24-25, 2
Chronicles 36, and Jeremiah 39.
Now, what is not mentioned in any of these accounts of the judgment of God on Judah?
Terrorists are not mentioned. Bricks are not mentioned, fallen or otherwise. A tower is not
mentioned. Gazit stones are not mentioned, nor stones of any sort. Sycamores are not
mentioned. Cedars are not mentioned, nor any members of the pinacaea family.14
There is
no ―utterance,‖ and therefore no ―prophecy‖ of the sort Cahn talks about.
Ironically, the only ―harbinger‖ mentioned is a ―breach‖ (in Jeremiah 39:2), but unlike
Cahn‘s harbinger, this is not an “initial strike on the land‖ that is limited in scope and
temporary in duration, but is part of the final destruction of Judah.
Do understand the significance of this: not even one “harbinger” that “had to
manifest” according to Cahn actually manifested in the judgment upon the only other
covenant nation in history, Judah. The conclusion is inescapable: Isaiah 9:10 is not
programmatic. It is not ―an ancient mystery.‖ Cahn‟s second pillar fails. Utterly.
Completely.
Now, since both pillars of Cahn‟s case fail, it should be clear that his entire case falls
apart. It should not be necessary to go any further. And yet we wonder about those amazing
parallels between ancient Israel and modern America. Surely that is too many parallels to
explain as simply coincidences, isn‘t it? But that question presupposes that there actually are
amazing parallels between Israel and America. Let us proceed to examine these putative
parallels and see the truth about them.
14
In Jeremiah 6:6 there is a prophetic command from God to the attackers to “cut down trees.” Here the generic word for tree, ets, it used. In Jeremiah 22:7 there is a prophetic warning that the attackers “shall cut down your choice cedars.” According to Cahn, it is sycamores that are supposed to be cut down; cedars are supposed to be planted.
CAHN‟S HARBINGERS
The First Harbinger: The Breach
According to Cahn, the first harbinger is the ―breach of a nation‘s hedge of protection.‖ God
had put a hedge of protection around Israel and around America, and until that hedge
is removed, the nation is “almost impenetrable.” But because of the nation‘s sin, God
removes this hedge of protection and allows the enemy in, leading to an ―initial strike on the
land.‖ This initial strike is limited in scope and temporary in duration, but it is a warning:
final destruction will follow if the nation does not repent.
In the case of ancient Israel, the ―initial strike‖ was the Assyrian attack in 732 BC. In the
case of America, the ―initial strike‖ was the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center
that killed brought down the twin towers and killed almost 3,000 people.
Now, there are two main problems with Cahn‟s analysis:
• Was there ever a ―hedge of protection‖ around the United States?
• And if so, when was it broken?
Consider the following picture:
In a battle between King Kong and the girl here, who would require a ―hedge of protection‖?
Or, to put it another way, if Kong defeats this girl in a fight, could we conclude that there was
a ―hedge of protection‖ around him, or simply realize that he won the battle because he is
much bigger and stronger than the girl?
When Israel triumphed against foes, it is reasonable to believe that there was a ―hedge of
protection‖ around them because (a) they were actually God‘s covenant people; and (b) they
were not more powerful than other nations; on the contrary, they ―were the least of all
peoples‖ (Deuteronomy 7:8a). America, on the other hand, has long been the leading
superpower among nations, so there is no necessary reason to attribute her military
prowess to a special “hedge of protection,” any more than there would be reason to think
that there was a ―hedge of protection‖ around, say, the pagan Roman Empire in her glory
years.
The other problem with Cahn‘s claim is that, for all her power, America has been
“breached” in the past. For example, after initiating a war against Canada in 1812, in the
expectation that they could seize her territory while the British were occupied fighting
Napoleon in Europe, they found things did not go as expected, although they outnumbered
the Canadians 10 to 1.
On August 16, 1812, 730 Canadians and 600 Indian allies marched repeatedly around
Detroit like the Israelites around Jericho and finally captured the city almost without
firing a shot. The Americans suffered seven killed and 2,493 captured, whereas the total
Canadian casualties were two wounded. Where was America‘s ―hedge of protection‖?
Brigadier General William Hull surrenders Detroit to General Sir Isaac Brock
On October 13, 1812, 1,300 Canadians repelled an invasion attempt by an American force
of 3,550 at the Battle of Queenston Heights, taking casualties (killed, wounded, and
captured) of 128 while inflicting 1,105 casualties on the Americans.
At the Battle of the Chateauguay on October 26, 1813, 300 Canadians sent an invading
American force numbering 4,000 into retreat.
On November 11, 1813, 900 Canadians defeated 4,000 Americans at the Battle of
Crysler‘s Farm, ending the Americans‘ St. Lawrence Campaign.
Considering the odds in these battles, it would seem that if there was a “hedge of
protection” around anyone, it was around Canada, not the United States.
And then, with Napoleon finally vanquished, British regulars joined the fray. On August
24, 1814, they defeated the Americans at the Battle of Bladensburg, after which they
occupied Washington, D.C., and burned public buildings, including the White House, after
the President had fled. Where was America‘s ―hedge of protection‖?
One also wonders about a ―hedge of protection‖ that may (or may not) stop external foes,
but does nothing to prevent an internecine Civil War that rages for more than four years
(1861-1865) and costs America about 625,000 lives and almost 1.1 million total casualties.
Even if one wishes to ignore the foregoing, he still cannot ignore Pearl Harbor. This
surprise attack by the forces of Imperial Japan on the U.S naval forces in Hawaii on
December 7, 1941, was far more devastating to the United States than the 9/11 attack
was.
The Pearl Harbor attack led the United States into the biggest war in history and handed them
six months of defeat in the Pacific before they regrouped. The entire nation was involved in
this existential struggle, through, inter alia, conscription and rationing. There were more
than 405,000 American deaths as a result, and almost 1.1 million total casualties.
In light of the facts, it seems the height of absurdity to claim that there was a “hedge
of protection” around the United States until it was removed to allow the 9/11 attack. How Cahn‘s readers can swallow this claim and forget all about Pearl Harbor is difficult to
understand.
The Second Harbinger: The Terrorist
Recall Cahn‘s claim: The ―brutal, violent, vicious‖ Assyrians, he says, were terrorists: ―they
are the fathers of terrorism. They invented it, they created it, they mastered it, they
perfected it, which is to use terror as a strategy to accomplish an end,‖ which, Cahn says, is
the exact strategy of Al-Qaeda. Then, to make the parallel even closer, Cahn points out that
―U.S. soldiers undoubtedly came into contact with actual descendents of the ancient
Assyrians of Isaiah 9:10‖ when they went to war in Iraq.
In the case of the supposed second harbinger, Cahn is not only wrong, but he has
everything completely backwards. Modern-day terrorism as practiced by Al-Qaeda (and
others, including the PLO and the now-defunct Tamil Tigers) is a form of asymmetric
warfare used by a nearly impotent group against a vastly superior power that it cannot
confront militarily. Assyria was the exact opposite of ―a nearly impotent group‖; it was the
superpower of its day. Yes, it was ―brutal, violent, [and] vicious,‖ but so was every
superpower of the ancient world. If Assyria was more brutal, it differed only in degree, not in
essence. Trying to liken Assyria to Al-Qaeda, then, is simply a non-starter.
Second, we again look at the only other legitimate example of God judging a covenant
nation, Judah. Judah was conquered by the Babylonians, not the Assyrians, so the “sign
of the terrorist” was not fulfilled in this case. (If Cahn would try to argue that the
Babylonians were also terrorists, he would only nullify the supposed ―second harbinger,‖ for,
if the ―sign of the terrorist‖ is fulfilled only by proclaiming every attacking nation a terrorist,
whether it was or not, then it is no sign at all).
Finally, Cahn‘s attempt to draw the parallel between ancient Israel and America closer by
averring that ―U.S. soldiers undoubtedly came into contact with actual descendents of the
ancient Assyrians of Isaiah 9:10‖ when they went to war in Iraq backfires royally. The
terrorists that attacked America on 9/11 comprised fifteen Saudi Arabians, two from the
United Arab Emirates, and one each from Egypt and Lebanon – nary an “Assyrian” (read
Iraqi) among them! The mastermind, Osama bin Laden, was also a Saudi Arabian, not an
Iraqi (―Assyrian‖).
Furthermore, when ―U.S. soldiers undoubtedly came into contact with actual descendents
of the ancient Assyrians of Isaiah 9:10,” it was not because Iraq attacked the U.S., as
Assyria had attacked Israel, but because the U.S. attacked Iraq – again the exact
opposite of what happened to ancient Israel. And, whereas when Assyria attacked Israel,
the latter‘s very existence was threatened, and large chunks of her territory were taken from
her by the Assyrian conquerors, the polar opposite happened in 2003, when the American
superpower easily overwhelmed Iraq in short order.
The only possible conclusion here is that Cahn has utterly failed to make his
tendentious claim. There is no “second harbinger”; there is no “sign of the terrorist.”
The Third Harbinger: The Bricks
Cahn tells us that bricks fell down when Israel was attacked by Assyria, and bricks also fell
down when the World Trade Centre towers collapsed on 9/11. In fact, he asserts, fallen
bricks were the ―central image‖ of the 9/11 attack.
The problem with claiming that this is a ―harbinger,‖ however, is that fallen bricks are a
universal phenomenon when a city is attacked by an enemy. There is nothing special or
unique about it, so that “the bricks” cannot be considered a harbinger of anything.
Fallen bricks in Budapest after fighting during 1956 Hungarian uprising
While nothing more need be said, it can be pointed out that neither is it clear that ―fallen
bricks‖ are in fact the ―central image‖ of the 9/11 attack over all other images, and also that
there is no mention of ―fallen bricks‖ in the Biblical records of the subjugation and
subsequent fall of Jerusalem.
The Fourth Harbinger: The Tower
Recall Cahn‘s claim: While there is no mention of a tower in the Hebrew text of Isaiah 9:10,
the Septuagint (LXX), the ancient Greek translation widely in use among Jews of the
Diaspora during Jesus‘ time, reads ―The bricks are fallen down, but come, let us hew stones,
and cut down sycamores and cedars, and let us build for ourselves a tower.‖ This attitude
of defiance is repeated by America, says Cahn, as the U.S. is building a new tower, the
Freedom Tower, at Ground Zero.
Yet this putative “harbinger” is also tendentious. It is not clear why Cahn switches
from the Hebrew Masoretic text here to the LXX15
. In light of the fact, though, that the
15
For a discussion of the relative merits of the Masoretic text and the LXX, see our article “On the Merits of the Septuagint: A Response to Floyd Nolen Jones’ The Chronology of the Old Testament” at truthinmydays.com
buildings destroyed in the 9/11 attack were towers, it is not hard to see why one might want
to include the ―tower‖ as a harbinger, even though one must appeal to the LXX to find it.
Isaiah in the Masoretic Text (left) and the Septuagint (Right)
The problem for Cahn is that this is not the only difference between the Masoretic text
and the LXX of Isaiah 9:10. The LXX reads:
―The bricks are fallen down, but come, let us hew stones and cut down sycamores
and cedars, and let us build for ourselves a tower.‖
So if the LXX reading is accepted, then the claim that replacing the cut-down sycamores with
cedars is the seventh harbinger must be discarded, since according to the LXX both
sycamores and cedars are cut down. So Cahn cannot have both his “fourth harbinger”
and his “seventh harbinger.”
The Fifth Harbinger: The Gazit Stone
Cahn cites the precise words of Isaiah 9:10a, ―The bricks have fallen down, but we will
rebuild with hewn (in Hebrew: gazit) stones,‖ which show that the ancient Israelites reacted
to the fallen bricks caused by the Assyrian attack not with repentance but with a defiant
determination to rebuild and become stronger than before. This determination is indicated by
the promise to ―rebuild with hewn (Hebrew: gazit) stones‖ in place of the weaker bricks.
Accordingly, Cahn maintains, gazit stones are a harbinger that must manifest in America
in connection with the 9/11 attacks, and so it has happened: a hewn (gazit) block of granite
was laid on July 4, 2004, as the cornerstone for the Freedom Tower that was being built in
place of the fallen World Trade Centre.. This gazit stone, Cahn says, ―becomes a symbol of
defiance.‖
And yet again, Cahn‟s claim fails. He claims that gazit stones are a harbinger that must
manifest in America in connection with the 9/11 attacks, but that did not in fact happen:
The Americans did not rebuild with “hewn stones”! The Freedom Tower was built of
poured concrete, steel, and glass16
, not “hewn stones.” Even if there were one cornerstone
made of hewn granite, it would not constitute rebuilding with hewn stones (plural). It seems
However, it is a moot point, as there is no cornerstone made of hewn granite in the
Freedom Tower! Yes, such a cornerstone was unveiled on July 4, 2004, but it was
subsequently removed before construction began.
So the supposed harbinger of the gazit stone did not ―manifest‖ in any way connected with
the 9/11 attack; there was not even one gazit stone involved in any actual ―rebuilding.‖
Cahn‘s claim here must be accounted a failure.
To try to hold on to the fact that a hewn stone was placed at Ground Zero at any time is a
fulfillment of this harbinger, even though it was subsequently removed, would be fatuous.
The ancient Israelites vowed to rebuild with hewn stones, not just to put one hewn stone on
temporary display.
The Sixth Harbinger and Seventh Harbingers: The Sycamore
and the Erez Tree
Cahn‘s sixth and seventh harbingers are linked. Since Isaiah 9:10b records the Israelites
saying after the Assyrian attack that ―the sycamores are cut down, but we will replace them
with cedars,‖ Cahn insists that “a sycamore must be struck down and must be connected
with the [9/11] attack” – the sixth harbinger – and it must be replaced by a cedar – the
seventh harbinger.
As we have seen, Cahn found that an old sycamore right at the corner of Ground Zero had
been cut down by flying debris in the 9/11 attack, and then, a bit more than two years later, a
Norway spruce had been planted in its place. Cahn then showed that the word translated into
English as ―cedar‖ is the Hebrew word erez, which actually refer, he says, to all trees of the
pinacaea family – including the Norway spruce. Harbingers manifested.
And yet, once again, there is a problem. Leaving aside the obvious one, that one cedar
accidentally cut down and one Norway spruce planted in its place hardly corresponds to ―the
sycamores (plural) are cut down, but we will replace them with cedars (plural),‖ let‘s
consider another and more important matter.
Prima facie, a Norway spruce is not a cedar. In response, Cahn rightly points out that,
since the original text of Isaiah was written in Hebrew, not English, it is the meaning of the
Hebrew word here that is what matters, and the Norway spruce does fall within the
semantic domain of the Hebrew word erez. However, he did not do the same thing
regarding sycamores! This is not surprising; since the English words do match in this case,
there was no impetus to dig deeper.
Yet Cahn should have done so, because here the opposite obtains: while the English
words match, the Hebrew words, which is what matters, do not! The Hebrew shaqam in
Isaiah 9:10 refers to the Ficus sycomorus, which is a fig tree, also called the sycamore fig or
the fig-mulberry tree. What was cut down at Ground Zero on 9/11 was an American
sycamore, Platanus occidentalis. They are shown below:
What we see is that they are not the same type of tree, not even at the family level to
which Cahn appealed to show that an American spruce corresponds to the “cedar” in
Isaiah 9:10. So no shaqam (“sycamore”) was cut down in association with the 9/11
attack.
Furthermore, if the sixth harbinger fails, then the seventh also fails. The Norway spruce
may indeed be an erez tree, but it is not enough simply to have an erez tree; the harbinger was
an erez tree replacing a shaqam tree. If there is no shaqam tree, then this harbinger cannot
manifest, regardless of how many erez trees one may find, since none of them can replace a
non-existing shaqam tree.
Do recall what Cahn asserted: ―All these things manifesting, the sixth and seventh
harbinger together, and nobody is planning this out, nobody is, is figuring it out, nobody‘s
saying, ‗Let‘s do this with this‘; it‘s just happening. As with the rest of the harbingers,
they happened because they have to happen, they have to be manifest. So now, in order,
even the seventh harbinger is manifested, at the corner of Ground Zero.‖
The significance of this cannot be overstated. Cahn said ―the sixth and seventh harbinger
together…happened because they have to happen, they have to be manifest.‖ And yet the
sixth harbinger was not manifest. Cahn said it “had to happen,” yet it did not happen.
The Eighth Harbinger: The Utterance
According to Cahn, Israel defied God by vowing to rebuild, per Isaiah 9:10:
―The bricks have fallen down,
But we will rebuild with hewn stones;
The sycamores are cut down,
But we will replace them with cedars.‖
Therefore, says Cahn, ―For the eighth harbinger to manifest in America, what has to happen
is that an American leader, or prominent American leader, would have to proclaim these
words of defiance in a public setting in the capital city.‖ Now, one can search carefully
through Isaiah 9:10, but he will not find these specifications in the actual text of that
passage. Cahn, therefore, has simply proclaimed these specifications to create his eighth
harbinger, and it is not clear why anyone should accept them.
Be that as it may, Cahn claims that his eighth harbinger was manifested on
September 11, 2004, when Senator John Edwards quoted Isaiah 9:10 during an address
to the Congressional Black Caucus Prayer Breakfast. ―So he gets up to speak, and he has
no idea what he‘s about to do,‖ says Cahn, and then this follows:
Cahn says, ―I t‘s mind boggling, it‘s amazing that he would say this. He doesn‟t realize
‟cause no one would say this if they knew what it was…he proclaims it without knowing
it. He‟s uttering the vow and he‘s now making the ancient vow, he‟s transforming it now
into America‟s vow, which is ominous because that vow was sealing the fate of ancient
Israel for destruction. So the eighth harbinger, the vow, the utterance, is manifested in
Washington D.C.‖
This is absurd on the face of it. Edwards and other American political leaders (or, more
likely, their speechwriters) cast about in the Bible for some verse that could be used to
address a situation in which ―bricks have fallen,‖ and Isaiah 9:10 was the obvious – indeed,
the only – choice. True, they overlooked the context, but no one has ever accused American
political leaders of being Bible scholars. There is no reason to think they quoted this passage
with the intent to show defiance against God; even Edwards in this speech actually said,
―Good morning. Today, on this day of remembrance and mourning, we
have the Lord‟s word to get us through. ‗The bricks have fallen, but
we will build with dressed stones; the sycamores have been cut down,
but we will put cedars in their place.‘‖
That hardly sounds like defiance against God. So Cahn pleads ignorance on behalf of
John Edwards, saying ―So he gets up to speak, and he has no idea what he‘s about to
do…He doesn‘t realize ‘cause no one would say this if they knew what it was…he proclaims
it without knowing it.‖ The only way to take Cahn‘s point seems to be that he is saying that
Edwards was being defiant without knowing it. Ridiculous; defiance by definition requires
intent.
Finally, while the details of this situation may meet the arbitrary, ad hoc standards set by
Cahn for his eighth harbinger, the fact is that Edwards is just one senator among many; he is
not the President or the entire senate, and to suggest that his personal remarks in such a
low level meeting as the Congressional Black Caucus Prayer Breakfast, which in no way
speaks on behalf of the American government or people, can be taken as a vow on behalf of
America, thus ―transforming‖ ―the ancient vow‖ ―now into America‘s vow‖ is ridiculous.
Utterly ridiculous.
The Ninth Harbinger: The Prophecy
Finally Cahn posits his ninth harbinger as we have seen: ―The ninth harbinger is the vow in
the form of prophecy or „The Prophecy‟…the vow, the ancient vow, is to be proclaimed
in America by an American leader in the capital city, and it‘s proclaimed prophetically
in advance of what is about to happen. It‘s gonna to foretell the course of America before
it happens and it‘s gonna become part of the national record.‖
Cahn continues: ―The vow of the ancient leaders of Israel was also prophetic because
they were speaking what would happen. They were foretelling the nation‟s course of
defiance and judgment and it becomes part of the prophetic record of the Bible, because
Isaiah quotes it as a comment on it from God‘s judgment on the vow, so it also becomes a
prophetic utterance in that respect.‖
Then Cahn claims that this harbinger, too, has been manifested: ―On the day after 9/11, in
the capital city, on Capitol Hill, a national leader, a very high national leader, the senate
majority leader Tom Daschle – he is the one who‘s appointed to bring America‘s response
to 9/11…This is the official response of America to 9/11.‖ And that response, says Cahn,
is the very vow of defiance in Isaiah 9:1017
Cahn insists that Daschle is ―proclaiming judgment on the nation from Capitol Hill on the
very day after 9/11 that there would not be national revival in the wake of 9/11 but there
would be national defiance.‖
Then, because the words of Daschle‘s speech are recorded in the Congressional Record,
Cahn says, ―This is the official response of America to 9/11 and that actual response is Isaiah
9:10. It‘s in the Senate record. It is the, the ancient vow.‖ Cahn concludes, ―How could this
possibly become our response? It happened because it had to happen. The harbinger had
to manifest and so it did, on the very day after the calamity: the ninth harbinger.‖
17
Do note that Daschle’s quote correctly says “fig trees” instead of “sycamores.” Cahn somehow doesn’t seem to have noticed the problem this occasions for his sixth harbinger.
Yet again, there are a plethora of problems with Cahn‟s putative ninth harbinger. The first question that is raised is how exactly does this differ from the eighth harbinger?
According to Cahn, ―For the eighth harbinger to manifest in America, what has to happen is
that an American leader, or prominent American leader, would have to proclaim these words
of defiance in a public setting in the capital city,‖ and that, he said, was manifested on
September 11, 2004, when Senator John Edwards quoted Isaiah 9:10 in an address to the
Congressional Black Caucus prayer breakfast. But, as Cahn tells us, Tom Daschle quoted
Isaiah 9:10 on September 12, 2001, and Daschle was a ―prominent American leader‖
speaking ―in a public setting in the capital city.‖ So would this not itself already be a
manifestation of the eighth harbinger? Why would we have to wait another three years less a
day for Edwards to speak? Cahn seems to have just destroyed his eighth harbinger!
The second question is this: What possible justification does Cahn have for claiming
that speaking “prophetically” is a harbinger found in Isaiah 9:10, or that it has been
fulfilled? How is ―becom[ing] part of the national record‖ equivalent to ―speaking
prophetically‖? Everything in Isaiah is prophetic because it is Scripture, and all prophecies
of Scripture come directly from God (2 Peter 1:20-21); it was not man‘s initiative or decision
to put Isaiah 9:10 into the Bible. To draw any sort of parallel, then, between the fact that the
response of the ancient Israelites is recorded in Isaiah 9:10 and the fact that Tom Daschle‘s
speech is recorded in the Congressional Record, is unacceptable.
SCRIPTURE = WORD OF GOD NOT SCRIPTURE = NOT WORD OF GOD
In fact, Cahn‘s idiosyncratic definition of ―prophetic‖ here is completely off the mark. A
simple enunciation of your plan as to what you are going to do is not a “prophecy.” To
say that American leaders are speaking ―prophetically‖ because they say that ―we will
rebuild‖ is unsustainable.
It gets worse, however. Here is the text of Daschle‘s comments the day after 9/11:
―Mr. President, it is with pain, sorrow, anger, and resolve that I stand
before this Senate, a symbol for 212 years of the strength of our
democracy, and say that America will emerge from this tragedy, as we
have emerged from all adversity, united and strong… The world
should know that the Members of both parties in both Houses stand
united. The full resources of our Government will be brought to bear in
aiding the search and rescue and in hunting down those responsible
and those who may have aided or harbored them. Nothing, nothing can
replace the losses that have been suffered. I know there is only the
smallest measure of inspiration that can be taken from this devastation.
But there is a passage in the Bible from Isaiah that I think speaks
to all of us at times such as this: The bricks have fallen down, but
we will rebuild with dressed stone; the fig trees have been felled,
but we will replace them with cedars. That is what we will do. We
will rebuild and we will recover. The people of America will stand
strong together because the people of America have always stood
together. And those of us privileged to serve this great Nation will
stand with you.‖18
Here is what Cahn has to say about Daschle‘s statement:
―Here is the man appointed to give the nation‘s response, speaking in
his capacity, representing the nation. He utters the words of ancient
Israel and he closes the speech with these words; he says this: ‗That is
what we will do. We will rebuild and we will recover.‘ ‗That is what
we will do‘ – he‘s referring to Isaiah 9:10, he just said it, so what, this
is mind boggling. What he‘s saying is America‘s policy now,
America‘s course, will be Isaiah 9:10. And this is prophetic in so many
ways…He‘s proclaiming judgment on the nation from Capitol Hill on
the very day after 9/11, that there would not be national revival in the
wake of 9/11 but there would be national defiance, and this is an
ominous, ominous thing.‖
Read Daschle‟s statement again, and ask yourself whether any fair-minded person
could conclude that Daschle is saying is that “America‟s policy now, America‟s course,
will be Isaiah 9:10,” or that there would not be national revival…but there would be
national defiance.” Someone who has been carried along with Cahn‘s case thus far and has
not noticed the multitude of errors in it may accept Cahn‘s claims here in passing, but if one
thinks about it, they are seen to be ridiculous. Ancient Israel was required to live according
to the very specific Mosaic law by covenant, they were refusing to live according to it and
they knew it, and they had been warned specifically by prophets of God that destruction
would come upon them for this. Therefore it is reasonable to see Israel‘s statement in Isaiah
9:10 as intentional defiance, but there is no parallel in modern America or in Daschle‟s
speech; the very idea is fatuous.
So we reach the end of Cahn‘s exposition of his nine harbingers, and he concludes, ―How
could this possibly become our response? It happened because it had to happen. The
harbinger had to manifest and so it did, on the very day after the calamity: the ninth
harbinger. All nine harbingers manifested in precision, in exactness, harbingers of
judgment.‖‖
The reality, as we have seen, is radically different. There are no “harbingers” in
Isaiah 9:10. There are historical details which Cahn has idiosyncratically and illegitimately
18
“Floor Statement by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle on a Joint Resolution of Condemnation for Yesterday’s Attacks And Support for the Victims.” United States Senate. Sept. 12, 2001. Cited in http://www.holybibleprophecy.org/2011/09/11/911-10th-anniversary-the-lords-word-in-september-11th-by-elliott-nesch/
The 2008 crash doesn‟t even make the Top 10 list! It is also interesting to note that the top
nine all happened while, according to Cahn, America was still under God’s “hedge of
protection.‖ How does Cahn explain that a stock market crash that is supposed to be a
manifestation of God‘s judgment after He has removed His hedge of protection from
America is not as bad as nine previous crashes that happened while America was under
God‘s hedge of protection? It is indeed interesting how different things can look when they
are put into context.
Yet Cahn goes on, asserting that ―it goes back to this Biblical principle, and here are
commentaries saying this: ‗Divine anger, being a remedial force, or corrective force, will not
cease until its purposes are brought out. If one expression is resisted, another must be
found.‖ Cahn does not tell us which ―commentaries,‖ but it really doesn‘t matter, for he has
not been arguing for a “commentaries effect” based on the made-up claims of unnamed
commentators, but for an “Isaiah 9:10 effect” based on Isaiah 9:10. Yet, as we have
already seen, Isaiah 9 does not say that ―‗Divine anger, being a remedial force, or corrective
force, will not cease until its purposes are brought out‘,‖ nor is there any such principle in the
Bible.
In fact, the very idea put forth by these ―commentaries‖ is ridiculous; if the purpose of
divine anger is ―corrective‖ and it ―will not cease until its purposes [i.e. corrective, which can
only be brought out by repentance] are brought out,‖ it follows that ―divine anger‖ must
always result in repentance, and that is patently not so. In reality, divine anger is retributive.
It can be forestalled by genuine repentance [there is a great example in Jonah 3], but in the
absence of repentance it leads to destruction, not to another ―expression‖ being found.
Which, as we have shown, is exactly what happened in Isaiah 9! If what happened in
Isaiah 9 is replaced with claims from commentaries (and erroneous claims, at that), this
can no longer be described as an “Isaiah 9:10 effect.” We have indeed now wandered
far from the Bible.
Now, Cahn mentioned the Great Depression, and this surfaces yet another problem with
his case. The Great Depression was a vastly worse disaster than was the 2008 crash,
occasioning genuine existential hardship to Americans in a way that Americans living in
2008 could not even imagine. Yet it happened while, according to Cahn, America was under
God‘s hedge of protection. Was it a manifestation of divine anger, or did it just happen? If it
just happened, how is America supposed to see God‘s wrath in an event much less severe
than another event that ―just happened‖? But if it was a manifestation of divine anger,
shouldn‘t the hedge have already been removed?
The problems with Cahn‘s case continue to mount. The Great Depression was followed
by Pearl Harbor, a much more devastating attack with far more severe consequences than the
9/11 attack – and this, too, happened while America was supposedly under God‘s hedge of
protection. Was this a manifestation of divine anger? Was it the Isaiah 9:10 effect? If not,
why should 9/11 and 2008 be considered the Isaiah 9:10 effect if the Great Depression
and Pearl Harbor are not? But if it is the Isaiah 9:10 effect, how come the ―second
shaking‖ came before the ―initial breach‖? Doesn‘t that break the pattern (a pattern that was
established on the basis of one example)? And doesn‘t ―second‖ come after ―first‖ by
definition? (Or can we appeal to the ―ancient mystery‖ of Matthew 20:16 – ―So the last will
be first, and the last first‖ – to get around this problem?)
Furthermore, if the 9/11 attack and the 2008 were meant to be ―a warning of the, of the
final destruction that will come if that nation does not turn back,‖ did America turn
back? Did America repent? If so, how was the repentance shown? Was it by banning
prayers in public schools (1962)? Was it by legalizing abortion (1973)? Clearly America did
not repent, and, by Cahn‘s own statement, this refusal to turn back should have been followed
by ―final destruction,‖ not by a replaying of the putative ―Isaiah 9:10 effect‖ in 2001 and
2008. After all, according to the nameless ―commentaries‖ to which Cahn appeals, ―if one
expression [of divine anger] is resisted, another must be found.‖ So why would the same
manifestation be replayed in 2001 and 2008? No matter how it‘s looked at, Cahn‟s
analysis simply does not fit the facts.22
It doesn‘t even come close.
Yet Cahn continues. He cites Ezekiel 13:14 (―So I will break down the wall you have
plastered with untempered mortar, and bring it down to the ground so its foundation will be
exposed‖) and asserts that
―One signs of judgment is the laying bare of foundations, the exposing
of a nation‘s foundations. What is a nation‘s foundation? It‘s that on
which it rests or that in which it trusts. America has been the world‘s
greatest economic, financial superpower of the past century, but what
is the foundation of that superpower that could be laid bare in the time
of judgment and that could be linked to 9/11? America‘s financial
power has centered on the island of Manhattan.‖
Cahn goes on to identify this foundation as the New York Stock Exchange, and goes on to
point out that the NY Stock Exchange was originally called the Buttonwood Association,
formed by the Buttonwood Agreement, so named because it was signed under a buttonwood
tree. And what sort of tree is a buttonwood tree? Cahn tells us, ―Buttonwood is another way
of saying ‗the sycamore tree.‘‖
Cahn no doubt expects his audience to find this impressive, but it is anything but. In
fact, the errors here on his part are very serious. The most obvious is this: what possible
justification is there for appealing to Ezekiel 13:14 here? What objective basis is there for
thinking that this verse, out of the other 23,143 verses in the Old Testament, should be linked
to the ―Isaiah 9:10‖ effect? In fact, there is no such basis.
The very idea is absurd. Ezekiel is prophesying to Judah, not Israel, and he is prophesying
well over a century after the final destruction of Israel. Furthermore, this is an oracle against
Judah‘s prophets, who are not telling the people the truth; it has nothing to do with national
repentance or economic foundations. It is completely illegitimate, therefore, to link
Ezekiel 13:14 to any supposed “Isaiah 9:10 effect.”
Frankly, the hermeneutics here is embarrassing. It is redolent of the apocryphal example
of one who claims that the Bible teaches that we should commit suicide because, look:
22
Cahn claims that “This collapse [of September 2008] that comes on the American economy weakens the American economy and hastens the end of the era of America’s reign over the economic global order.” Yet almost five years later, America’s economy remains the world’s largest by far, the U.S dollar remains the world’s reserve currency, and most of the innovation still happens there. The stock market (as measured by the Dow Jones Industrial average reached a record 14,715 in May of 2008 before crashing to a low of 6,443.27 on March 6, 2009 – but had reached a record of 15,589.40 on July 18, 2013. All of the losses have been made up, and then some, and all without national repentance.
―He went and hanged himself‖ (Matthew 27:5)
―Go and do likewise‖ (Luke 10:37)
―What you do, do quickly.‖ (John 13:27)
There is no hermeneutical reason to connect Ezekiel 13:14 to Isaiah 9:10, any more than to
connect Matthew 27:5 to Luke 10:37 and John 13:27. We also note that Cahn asked ―what is
the foundation of that superpower that could be laid bare in the time of judgment and that
could be linked to 9/11?‖ We should we cast about the Bible trying to find something ―that
could be linked to 9/11‖? Is this not making the Bible fit events, rather than seeing whether
events fit what the Bible says?
CAHN‟S “ANCIENT, ANCIENT MYSTERY OF THE SHEMITAH”
Moving from the risible to the ludicrous, Cahn turns to what he calls ―the mystery of the
Shemitah.‖ He rightly says, ―God gave a command to Israel called the Shemitah or the
Seventh Year or the Sabbath Year command.‖ Indeed He did; it is found in Exodus 23:10-
11, Leviticus 25:1-5, and Deuteronomy 5:1-2, as follows:
―Six years you shall sow your land and gather in its produce, but the
seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow, that the poor of your
people may eat; and what they leave, the beasts of the field may eat. In
like manner you shall do with your vineyard and your olive grove.‖
(Exodus 23:10-11)
And the LORD spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai, saying, ―Speak to the
children of Israel, and say to them: ‗When you come into the land
which I give you, then the land shall keep a sabbath to the LORD. Six
years you shall sow your field, and six years you shall prune your
vineyard, and gather its fruit; but in the seventh year there shall be a
sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a sabbath to the LORD. You shall
neither sow your field nor prune your vineyard. What grows of its own
accord of your harvest you shall not reap, nor gather the grapes of your
untended vine, for it is a year of rest for the land. (Leviticus 25:1-5)
―At the end of every seven years you shall grant a release of debts. And
this is the form of the release: Every creditor who has lent anything to
his neighbor shall release it; he shall not require it of his neighbor or
his brother, because it is called the Lord‘s release.‖ (Deut. 5:1-2)
Cahn avers that ―The Shemitah was meant to be a blessing, but if the nation turned away
from God, the Shemitah turns from a blessing to a judgment, to a sign,‖ though this goes
beyond what the text says. Cahn states that ―In Israel‘s history, the people would be driven
from the land, and the land would rest, and God said, ‗Now the land is gonna keep its
Sabbaths, or Shemitahs,‖ though in point of fact this happened only once, when the people of
Judah were exiled to Babylon; it was not a pattern or a principle.
Now, Cahn has correctly said that God gave this command ―to Israel.‖ It was a faith-
based economic policy for Israel alone, and had nothing to do with any other nation,
including the United States. Yet, incredibly, Cahn claims that “so the Shemitah also holds
the key to the timing of the judgment on a nation.‖ No, it doesn‟t. There is absolutely no
Biblical warrant for the claim that this law given to Israel alone has any role to play in the
judgment of any other nation. So there is no basis for trying to link the Shemitah to
America.
Nevertheless, Cahn tries to do so. He claims, wrongly, that ―the Shemitah causes
production to cease, labour to cease‖ (it only applied to agriculture, not to other forms of
production and labour) and then says that ―that can resemble an economic collapse.‖
Interesting; according to Cahn “The Shemitah was meant to be a blessing…that can
resemble an economic collapse.”23
Most people would not consider an economic
collapse to be a blessing. And then comes the attempt to dragoon the Shemitah into the case
against America:
―When did the economic collapse of America happen? This is the
‗second shaking‘. It happened seven years after the first shaking. It
happened seven years after 9/11. So if you didn‘t have 9/11, this
would not have happened. That means even 9/11 is woven into the
mystery – an ancient, ancient mystery – of the Shemitah.‖
Again, Cahn is wrong on almost every count. As we have already shown, the 2008 crash
was not a ‗second shaking‘; indeed, Isaiah 9:10 does not allow for a ‗second shaking.‘ It is
not true that ―if you didn‘t have 9/11, this would not have happened.‖ As we have already
shown, the 2008 crash was caused by wildly irresponsible government interference in the
economy that started long before 9/11 and would have resulted in the crash regardless of
whether 9/11 happened or not. And the ―Shemitah‖ was a specific principle given to ancient
Israel, and the nation and the principle have both long since ceased to exist. Thus, the
Shemitah is not an ―ancient, ancient mystery‖ – indeed, it is not a mystery at all – and the
assertion that 9/11 ―is woven into‖ this non-existent ―mystery‖ is baseless fantasy.
Cahn now tries to play his ace-in-the hole, pointing out that the peak of the financial crisis
happened on September 29, 2008. This day marked ―the greatest stock market crash in the
history of Wall Street,‖ and on the Hebrew calendar September 29, 2008, was Elul 29, ―the
exact Biblical day specifically ordained to touch a nation‘s financial accounts…the exact
Biblical day that is a judgment to the nation that has driven God out of its life.‖ Furthermore,
not only did September 29, 2008, mark the end of 7-year period, but the stock market
dropped by 777 points on that day, which represented 7% of its value! And ―seven‖, says
Cahn, is the ―key number of the Shemitah.‖
More amazing claims follow. Cahn asserts that September 29, 2008, ―was an end of a
seven-year cycle so there should be another event seven years before, that began it in the
financial realm. And so there was, says Cahn; the greatest previous stock market crash
occurred on September 17, 2001. ―So right there you have the Shemitah,‖ says Cahn. ―You
have a seven-year period beginning with the greatest crash and ending with the greatest crash
on September 29, 2008.‖ And, to clinch it, September 17, 2011, was also Elul 29 on the
23
Cahn’s description applies to the Shemitah simpliciter, regardless of whether or not it is being a sign of judgment.
Hebrew calendar – and, in fact, they were both the very Elul 29 that marks the end of the
Shemitah!
Cahn sums it up: both crashes took place on Elul 29, ―the day when a nation‘s financial
accounts are wiped away. So the two greatest stock market point crashes in the history of
Wall Street up to that day happened on the exact – both of them – on the exact Biblical day
ordained to touch a nation‘s financial realm…exactly seven Hebrew years apart!‖
Prima facie this all may seem astounding, but a closer look reveals that Cahn‟s case
here, too, is far off the mark. We again note the illegitimate application of the Shemitah.
Contra Cahn, Elul 29 was not ―the exact Biblical day specifically ordained to touch a nation‘s
financial accounts…the exact Biblical day that is a judgment to the nation that has driven
God out of its life‖; it was the ordained day in which the ancient Israelites, under the Old
Covenant, were required to cancel all personal loans. It has never applied to the U.S. or to
any other nation. For Cahn to speak of ―a nation‖ as if the Shemitah had general application
is wrong.
Second, despite Cahn‟s fervent attempt to draw parallels between the OT Shemitah
and the 2008 stock market crash, there is no real parallel. The 2008 crash only affected a
small percentage of all the existing loans in the United States at the time. The loans were not
released; people lost their homes precisely because the loans were not released. Stock
market losses do not represent released debts, since stock purchases are not loans; the buyer
receives part ownership of the company whose stock he is buying.
And Elul 29 comes at the end of year in which agricultural activity ceased, not the beginning,
and in the case of the 2008 crash, the economy went into the doldrums after Elul 29, not
before.
It should be clear, then; Cahn‘s attempt to redefine the Shemitah from what it was – the
day at the end of the Sabbath year on which the Israelites were required to cancel personal
debts – to what it wasn‘t – ―the exact Biblical day specifically ordained to touch a nation‘s
financial accounts‖ – is already illegitimate. And, as we have shown, even with that
redefinition, the 2008 crash still does not fit.
Third, as we have already seen, the 2008 crash was far from being “the greatest stock
market crash in the history of Wall Street,” when measured by percentage drop, the
only meaningful way, instead of by point drop, as Cahn professedly does. Nor was the
September 17, 2001, crash the worst before that. As the following table shows24
, the drop of
September 29, 2008, stands as only the 20th
worst drop in history (it was the 17th
worst when
it happened), and the drop of September 17, 2001, is only the 17th
worst (14th
worst when it
happened).
Fourth, and more importantly, Cahn wants us to see profound significance in this pattern,
viz. that the ―worst‖ stock market crash happened on Elul 29, and the previous ―worst‖ stock
market crash happened on Elul 29, exactly seven Hebrew years earlier. However, a pattern
cannot be established on the basis of two samples (any more than a curve can be plotted
from two points, which always and only can yield a straight line). We have to ask whether
this seven-year ―Shemitah‖ pattern has held generally in relation to America‘s financial
downturns. The following is a partial list drawn from the table above (going backwards from
September 29, 2008), showing the time spans between them:
The facts are abundantly clear; there is no Shemitah pattern to America’s stock
market crash history, even if point drops are viewed. Therefore, it is clear that Elul 29 is
most certainly not “the exact Biblical day specifically ordained to touch a nation‟s
financial accounts.” There is no such day. The Shemitah was something that applied only
to ancient Israel, and has nothing to do with America‘s economic problems or 9/11.
25
ibid.
There remains still one more problem with Cahn‘s case for the ―ancient, ancient mystery
of the Shemitah.‖ It is the most obvious problem, one that utterly destroys Cahn‟s
argument, even without any of the previous problems. It is this: Cahn‘s whole case is
predicated upon Isaiah 9:10 being the paradigm of judgment that is now coming upon
America. What happened to ancient Israel is now being recapitulated in modern America.
Now, what did happen to ancient Israel? It was the one nation (two, if we count Judah as a
separate nation) to which the Shemitah did apply, unlike America. So if ―the Shemitah also
holds the key to the timing of the judgment on a nation,‖ as Cahn insists, then surely it must
do so in regard to the one nation that was required to observe the Shemitah: ancient Israel.
When did the ―breach,‖ the first strike, befall ancient Israel? We have already discussed
this: The first strike described in Isaiah 9:10 happened in 732 BC.
When did the so-called ―second shaking,‖ which was actually the final destruction of
Israel, happen? 721 BC.
How much time passed between 732 BC and 721 BC? Eleven years. ELEVEN YEARS.
NOT. SEVEN. Now if the ―ancient, ancient mystery of the Shemitah,‖ as Cahn styles it, did
not ―hold the key to the timing of the judgment‖ on Israel, then it does not hold the “key to
the timing of the judgment on anyone, including the United States. There is no “ancient,
ancient mystery of the Shemitah.” Q.E.D.: Cahn’s claims here are nonsense.26
THE THREE WITNESSES
Cahn next turns his attention to back to another topic, which has already been debunked. He
puts a new introductory spin on it now, telling us that ―There‘s a law in the Bible that for a
truth to be established or a judgment to be pronounced, there has to be two or three witnesses
testifying‖ and then he asks, ―and what happens if we bring this to a national level?‖ He
continues, ―The most dramatic witness of America under judgment is the proclaiming of the
ancient vow of judgment that links America to ancient Israel, that links America to being a
nation in defiance, a nation that is being shaken and being called back to God,‖ and then he
again appeals to Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, Senator John Edwards, and President
Barack Obama at various times pledging to rebuild America.
Not much needs to be said here. We have already shown conclusively that these men did
not issue an “ancient vow of defiance,” that there is no such thing as unintentional defiance,
and that America is not linked to ancient Israel. The only new thing that has to be said is in
regard to Cahn‘s new introductory spin, in which he has again misunderstood the Bible. The
law of witnesses concerned judicial inquiries to discover the truth about what had happened
in a past event; it had nothing to do with three people speaking in order to make something
true. And, accordingly, this law cannot be brought ―to a national level.‖
26
It is hardly worth mentioning Cahn’s last point here, viz. that “There is one more mystery of the Shemitah, that the shemitah means literally in Hebrew, it can mean ‘the release,’ but it can also mean ‘the letting fall’ or ‘the collapse,’ ‘the letting collapse.’ So what was the Shemitah? Not only the collapse of the economy according to an ancient mystery, but it’s the letting collapse of the American-led world order; it’s letting collapse America’s prosperity.” Thus far, the American-led world order and prosperity has not collapsed.
THE MYSTERY GROUND
Finally, Cahn revisits his attempt to draw a parallel between the founding of ancient Israel
and the founding of America, relating to what he calls ―The Mystery Ground.‖ His assertion
is that ―There is a mystery that‘s been hidden in the foundation of America from its very
beginning, from its very first day as a nation and it‘s a biblical mystery that has to do with
dedication, consecration, and judgment.‖ Cahn now revisits his earlier claims that ―America
is similar to Israel, was also founded on God‘s word. In fact, said Cahn, America was
founded originally by the Puritans to be a second Israel,‖ complete with its own consecration
day corresponding to Solomon‘s dedication of the temple; Washington, like a latter-day
Solomon, speaking of God‘s providence and warning against turning away; and prayer and
consecration by the new government. We have already examined these claims and found that
they are false.
Let us consider Cahn‘s new claims in this area. He claims to discover yet another
principle in the Bible: “So here‟s a principle: In the days of judgment, the calamity or
the destruction touches the nation‟s ground of consecration. The nation‟s ground of
dedication to God becomes its ground of judgment.” (The impossibility of proving a
principle on the basis of one example seems to continue to escape Cahn‘s notice.) As we
recall, Cahn identified April 30, 1789, the day on which George Washington was inaugurated
as her first president, as America‘s ―dedication day,‖ corresponding to Solomon‘s dedication
of the temple in 961 BC. And, since this happened in lower Manhattan in New York City,
Cahn identifies this site as America‘s ―consecration ground.‖
Furthermore, points out Cahn, ―the ground of consecration was a little stone chapel called
St. Paul‘s Chapel. It still stands today. Where is it located? It stands at Ground Zero.
America was dedicated to God on the corner of Ground Zero…America‘s consecration
ground is Ground Zero.‖ Linking this to the principle Cahn has claimed to discover, he
points out that “When judgment comes it returns to the nation‟s ground of consecration.
And so Ground Zero is America‟s mystery ground.” The 9/11 judgment, then, has fallen
upon America‘s ground of consecration, lower Manhattan, just as it fell upon Israel‘s ground
of consecration.
Only it didn‟t. Not only was America not dedicated to God, as we have already shown,
there is no such Biblical principle as the one Cahn claims to have discovered. What was
ancient Israel‘s ground of consecration? According to Cahn, it was Jerusalem (and
particularly the grounds of the temple). When judgment came upon ancient Israel in
Isaiah 9, the very passage on which Cahn builds his entire case, did it strike Jerusalem?
No. Jerusalem was the capital of Judah, and it was not touched during the ―first strike‖ on
ancient Israel in 732 BC, or in the destruction that followed in 721 BC.
So Cahn‘s case collapses. Jerusalem was indeed struck during the ―second shaking‖ of
Judah, but the supposed harbingers of Isaiah 9:10 did not manifest in Judah. The harbingers
supposedly manifested in Israel (though they did not, as we have shown), but the ground of
consecration was not touched. So neither this principle nor the idea of the harbingers is
true. And here ends Cahn‟s case.
Let us sum up what our analysis of Cahn‟s Harbinger and Isaiah 9/11 claims has
revealed:
• Cahn‘s case depends on the pillar that America, like Israel, was founded for God‘s
purposes, and turned away from Him. This has been shown to be WRONG.
• Cahn‘s case depends on Isaiah 9:10 being programmatic of how God deals with
rebellious nations. This, too, has been show to be WRONG.
• Cahn claims that there are nine harbingers in Isaiah 9:10. In reality, only four of the
elements are even mentioned, and there is no valid reason to consider any of them an
actual harbinger.
• Five harbingers are read into the passage, and there is no valid reason to consider any
of them a genuine harbinger.
• The harbingers have not been “manifested” in America. They are either too general
to be significant or they did not happen at all.
• Cahn claims that the ―first strike‖ is followed by a ―second shaking,‖ what he calls the
―Isaiah 9:10 effect,‖ but the actual Biblical text speaks only of destruction following
the first strike, and not a “second shaking.” • The effects that Cahn attributes to 9/11 were not in fact caused by 9/11.
• Cahn claims that the 2008 crash was caused by 9/11, but in reality it was caused by
government interference in the economy that began long before 9/11.
• Cahn describes the 2008 crash as the worst in American history, but in the only
meaningful way it was not even in the Top 10. America‘s economy did not actually
crash, and it remains the world leader.
• Cahn does not explain why 9/11 and the 2008 crash should be seen as signs of God‘s
hedge of protection having been removed, when worse disasters, the Pearl Harbor
attack and the Great Depression, happened while the hedge of protection was
supposedly still in place.
• Cahn illegitimately appeals to Ezekiel 13:14 to claim that an economic shaking should
follow the ―first strike,‖ when the actual passage under consideration, Isaiah 9, indicates
that destruction should follow the ―first strike.‖
• Cahn claims that there is an ―ancient, ancient mystery‖ of the Shemitah that ―holds the
key to the timing of the judgment on a nation,‖ when in fact there is no such mystery.
The Shemitah is not applicable to any nation other than ancient Israel; America‘s
economic crashes do not fit a seven-year pattern; and even the actual destruction of
ancient Israel came eleven years after the “first strike,” not seven.
• The founding documents of the United States show deism, not Christianity, in their
wording, calling into question Cahn‘s claim that America was founded for the glory of
God.
• Cahn claims that there is a principle that ―in the days of judgment, the calamity or the
destruction touches the nation‘s ground of consecration,‖ yet there is no such principle,
as even in the one relevant case, ancient Israel, this did not happen.
CONCLUSION
Jonathan Cahn‘s claim that there is an ancient mystery in Isaiah 9:10 that foretells America‘s
future, told in a fictional framework in his bestselling book The Harbinger and presented as
fact in his ―The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment‖ DVD has proven to be wildly popular among
American Evangelicals. And no wonder; the idea that there is such a detailed prophecy about
America written more than 2,700 years ago, and especially one that may be used to persuade
their beloved country to turn back from its current ungodly course, is a very appealing one.
We want it to be true. And the case Cahn makes does seem very convincing.
Nevertheless, we must apply the command of 1 Thessalonians 5:21 to Cahn‟s claims. We had to subject his claims to careful examination, and could hold on to them only if they
had proven to be ―good.‖ We had to assess Cahn‘s claims in light of both the applicable
Scriptures and the relevant facts.
When we did this, we found that Cahn‟s claims, which initially seemed so convincing,
crumbled one by one, until his whole case collapsed. This is not the result for which we
had hoped. However, as then future U.S. President John Adams said, ―Facts are stubborn
things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they
cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” The “state of facts and evidence”
overwhelmingly indicates that Cahn‟s claims are badly mistaken, and ought not to be
accepted by Evangelicals.
Finally, this phenomenon raises the question as to why Cahn‟s claims have been so
enthusiastically accepted by so many for so long, when any careful analysis will quickly
show that they are not even remotely valid. What has happened to the critical thinking
faculties of Evangelicals? Have we simply decided to ignore 1 Thessalonians 5:21? Have
we become like the people of Athens in Acts 17:21, who ―spent their time in nothing else but
either to tell or to hear some new thing‖? Have we decided not to bother fact-checking
claims anymore? If so, that may go a lot further towards explaining the troubling direction of
America today than any supposed ―ancient mystery‖ in Isaiah 9.
