Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

jjbernal

Members
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jjbernal

  1. https://plus.google.com/110222104229653001432#110222104229653001432/posts'
  2. One of the critics of The Harbinger has written: I found the dialog between Kaplan and Goren labored and tedious. It is not well written from a literary point of view. But what bothered me even more were the assumptions and manipulations presented as biblical truth. Even some of his historical presentations are not entirely accurate. It begins with Cahn's belief that Ancient Israel and modern America are the only two nations in history that were founded on the Word of God and uniquely dedicated to God's purpose. In reality many differences exist, however. Israel was found as a theocracy. The United States was not. In fact the Constitution clearly states that the United States is prohibited from establishing or endorsing any religion. In the truest sense, then, the United States is a secular nation. Even though many of the founding fathers were known to mention the name "God" from time to time, this cannot be construed as a desire to make the United States a "Christian Nation". Indeed, quite the opposite was true. Such quotes must be understood as little more than political jargon intended to win the support of potential voters. MY RPELY: It is amazing how two or more people who hold the same basic faith in God through faith in Christ, can read a book and walk away with two completely different opinions of the same book, but this is what has happened with The Harbinger. I understand when you write “I found the dialog (sic) Kaplan and Goren labored and tedious.” I understand you, and I must confess myself that personally for me, I found the book difficult to read; but that is a matter of personal preference and taste. We can understand that two different people can read the same book, watch the same film, or listen to the same song, and come away with completely different opinions and understanding of what they’ve experienced. Therefore whether one thinks that the interaction between the novel’s protagonists is compelling or a bore has no relevance as to the value of the work in question, nor does it impact it in the slightest with regards to its contents. The merits of The Harbinger stands on its own and not on whether we, or anyone else likes or dislikes the way it’s written. Yes, there are unmistakable differences between ancient Israel and modern America as manifested in the United States, but these differences do not mitigate the purposes of God, nor do they have any effect upon His will and how He operates in the lives of people and nations. I believe that we can agree on that right? As the Scripture says, God is not the respecter of persons. (Deuteronomy 10:17, Acts 10:34, James 1:17) THE CRITIC WRITES: Another difference is found in the fact that Israel was established by a covenant with God. The United States was established by revolution and rebellion. MY REPLY: Good observation. Israel was founded by covenant with God, but the land was seized and occupied by conquest at God’s command. What’s more, the covenant God made with Abraham was for him and his descendants and it pertained to the land of Canaan, but the special relationship and friendship that God and Abraham had, has since been established by grace through Jesus Christ to every person and every tongue under every nation under heaven. And it is by virtue of this process established by God through the Gospel of God’s extended grace through Jesus Christ to every nation, those among those nations and tongues and people may come to Him for grace and forgiveness and find it. Therefore if groups of people, communities and even regions or nations come before God and seek His face and make their peace with Him, He will honor their petition, heal their land, forgive their sins, and restore what was taken away. This is Biblical, because through the Gospel of Jesus Christ, God’s promise to Abraham that through his seed all the nations of the world would be blessed. (Acts 10:34-35, 43, 28:28, Romans 3:29-30, 10:12-13, 15:26, Acts 10:34-35, 17:26-27) The evidence for it is all over the Hebrew Scriptures and only the Cessationist, Dispensationist, and Minimalist say otherwise, because it does not fit their well-developed and structured nineteenth century human created systemized method of studying the Scriptures. Because much of the Post-Modern Protestant Cessationist Church has forgotten the very basics of God’s plan of salvation, we must return to those basics and study them anew to understand the implications of what The Harbinger’s critics are trying to teach and pass off as “correct Biblical Hermeneutics” to an unsuspecting and largely Biblically illiterate Christian public as “discernment.” In very fact, the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews unequivocally counts the consummation of the ages from the cross – a period in which Christ has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. (Hebrews 9:26). The consummation of what? The consummation of that which God had predestined before the foundation of the world – before time itself; yes, the consummation of the ages before which He had in His foreknowledge, predestined His will to do for man what He foreknew man could not do for himself, provide through the sacrifice of His Only Begotten Son our salvation (John 3:16-17, Hebrews 10:10-14); just as it says: For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. (Hebrews 9:24-26) We see it as early as Genesis if read properly and in its context – God’s redemptive plan made by Him before the foundation of the earth was laid. (Ephesians 1:4, 1Peter 1:20) An excellent commentary that explains predestination versus free will says the following which I quote from the margins of my own Bible. It is a commentary for Ephesians 1:4. I quote: “‘Election’ is a sovereign outworking of God’s power to effect that which is pleasing to Him according to His righteous and holy will. The New Testament uses the term ‘elect’ (eklektoi) to include a variety of meanings. Thus every believer is elected or chosen: (1) to good works (2:10); (2) to conformity to the image of Christ (Rom. 8:29); (3) to eternal glory (Rom. 9:23); (4) to adoption as a son (1:5). “But the aspect of election that has given rise to dispute relates to salvation itself. It has been argued that if only those who are elected are saved, then the death of Christ was really intended for them (limited atonement). Others insist that a ‘bona fide’ offer to men that all everywhere should repent (Acts 17:30) involves a divine intention for Christ’s atonement to save all mankind (unlimited atonement). Scripture teaches that election is according to God’s sovereign purpose (1:11; Rom. 8:29; 1Pet. 1:2). But nowhere does the Bible make explicit what it is in God’s foreknowledge that determines His election choice. At all events, the Scriptures appear to teach clearly enough that men are free agents with moral responsibility, while at the same time God is sovereign and works out all things according to His own good pleasure.” (Harold Lindsell Ph. D. D.D., commentary to Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians 1:4 in the margin of the New American Standard Bible, page 1487. Harper Study Bible, Zondervan Publishing House, 1985) What relevance does this have to The Harbinger and our discussion of this topic? Much, in fact everything. In it is the linchpin that flies in the face of every claim and criticism posited by The Harbinger’s critics upon which they base their arguments against the parallelisms that exist between ancient Israel and modern America.
  3. "Guilt by association?" They accused Christ of being a wine bibber and a glutton; a friend of the tax collectors and a sinner, because of the company He kept. Are we to do the same? No, of course not. Actually, The Harbinger has both supporters and critics on both sides of the Evangelical Protestant Divide. The biggest problem with the pure Cessationists is that any phrase, any word, any noun, pronoun, adjective, adverb, preposition, etc....that might appear to them to be a hint of a "revelation" or a "sign" when actually Cahn is using it to mean insight into a matter of Scriptural import and is referring to the clay seals in the story that are the "signs" of the events they represent is where The Harbinger's critics have gone completely awry and have weaved their protestations against to form a false narrative they have embarked on promoting, perhaps to help their waning ministry. The fact that they have lost all reasoning on this topic is evidenced by the manner they respond to concise Biblical challenges to their arguments when presented to them. When faced with the facts that they have created nothing but a straw man controversy applying semantical gymnastics over words that they determine mean one thing when actually they mean quite another within the story; they insist that their analysis is the correct one. Yes, even when it is explained to them that the meaning they give Cahn's book is not what the story says. I have spoken with Cahn, I have read his book, I know what he means when he employs words such as sign, mystery, etc.. and it is within the context of the story itself. You read the book, you realize that the clay seals depicting each Harbinger is a sign, much in the context of an Exit or Stop sign one sees when travelling a road. And as to mystery that is revealed, no Cahn is not practicing divination as one claims in a Sunday school sermon he gave at his church, but Cahn employs the word in the context of 1Corinthians 2, where the Apostle Paul studies the dichotomy between the regenerative man and the unregenerate man, and the two separate world views the two have and the completely different lives each leads, and how they understand things. When Cahn speaks of mysteries, he is referring to the fact that the Holy Scriptures and what they contain are both a mystery and a sealed book to the unsaved, not some new revelation or new prophecy outside of the cannon of Scripture that is to be treated as authoritative as the Bible as these people charge. That's simply absurd and completely groundless. Those who make such charges know themselves that this is not true; they are merely using hyperbole, and in so doing creating a false witness against Cahn that should not exist. This is very serious. I would strongly suggest that everyone who follows and reads this trend, purchase or borrow a copy of The Harbinger and read it for themselves, and not be allowed to be influenced by people whose premise in entirely incorrect, and whom have formed conclusions based upon those incorrect premises, all based upon unsupported charges concerning semantical questions about the meanings of words Cahn uses that do not have the meanings they give it. And as to whether or not any nation other than Israel can have its own covenant with the God of all Creation, I recommend everyone do a serious study of what the Bible says about this, and how it applies both to individuals, communities, organizations, and yes; nations. A covenant is a contract between two parties. Do the homework, and discover for yourselves just how far off these critics of The Harbinger are regarding correct hermeneutics and the concise application of Biblical exegesis when studying and expounding the Word of Almighty God. Thank you.
  4. For those who wish to hear something new on this post about The Harbinger and get a handle on the critics of this amazing book, I submit this post. I know Rabbi Cahn personally, and have known him for over ten years. He has been accused of everything from being a mystic who promotes Theosophy, to being a Kabbalist, to being a Gnostic, to promoting the Zohar and elevating the writings of the rabbis to the status of the Holy Scriptures, with the rabbi being on equal par with the prophets. Nonsense. Utter nonsense. Jonathan Cahn is not a mystic; he is not a Kabbalist, or a Gnostic, nor does he promote Theosophy, Scientology, or any other aberrant beliefs. He does not consider The Zohar, the Talmud, the rabbinic writings as inspired, nor has he ever elevated the rabbis to status of prophets. Those who contend that he does are bearing false witness against him and his book and his teachings. His use of passages in The Zohar, the rabbinic writings of the Talmud, and many of the writings of Judaism are employed as "hostile witnesses" in reinforcing the truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ by Rabbi Cahn, as they are often used by scholars and apologists to support the veracity of the Scriptures and their reliability, just they and he have used archeology as evidence of the Bible's historicity. In a court of law, this is called the use of the hostile witness for either cross examination, and it is used quite often by the best lawyers to develop and support their case. This is how Rabbi Cahn uses these writings, and how any Christian, Messianic Jew, or historian employs them, I know firsthand, because I also have used them this way. What is it about this that these people (The Harbinger's critics) fail to comprehend, and why do they make these absurd connections and voice these outlandish charges against this man and this book? This question requires a book of its own and I am at work on it as I write this. For those who wish to read both sides of the story, there are two websites that I recommend they go to, and even recommend WND to link up to, and they are my own site THE PEPSTER's POST: A VOICE IN CYBERSPACE, and FAITH'S CORNER. Both sites address the critics with cogent, and clear, and honest Biblical answers, and allow their points of view to be posted and addressed accordingly. Faith's Corner has been on top of this since The Harbinger was published late last year and earlier this year, and has devoted quite a bit of well-reasoned, well-studied, and clear, cogent analysis of these critics and what they say. Kudos to her. I highly recommend her site. She's been on this since the beginning of the controversy. Both Faith and I have been in direct contact on a one to one basis with one of the critics of The Harbinger; and speaking strictly for myself, I have come to realize that this person, who will remain nameless; has a predilection to read more into what one writes or says than the original intent given. He also jumps almost immediately to conclusions that simply are not true and not there. He is extremely distrustful, and no matter what efforts one makes to clarify the issue, or to bring it to an amicable end, there is always the question of one's personal veracity being brought into question. He also takes any criticisms, or disagreements with his book and criticisms of The Harbinger very personally. I have also realized by careful study of their book, and the several postings they've made on their web sites that there are several underlying problems to their approach of Cahn's book, and they are the following: 1.) They interpret into Cahn's writings and teachings things neither his writings or teachings ever intended to say, though they quote him at length. 2.) They do this by loading meanings into words that the words do not possess within the context of Cahn's book. 3.) They make semantical issues out words such as "mystery/ies," "secret/s," "prophetic," "inspired," and other adjectives employed by Cahn, and give them Cahn does not. Cahn simply uses such words and phrases in the context of 1Corinthans 2. As I’ve written elsewhere before, “To the unsaved the Bible is a closed book and its context, mysteries and secrets.” Paul makes this distinction in this entire chapter. 4.) They come to incorrect conclusions based upon incorrect predetermined premises that have compromised their study with bias. 5.) They are quick to make conclusions upon their flawed data. 6.) They have and continue to promote these conclusions and these accusations against Cahn regardless of efforts to explain clearly the meaning of what he has written. 7.) They are bearing false witness against Jonathan Cahn and against his book The Harbinger, and against everyone who supports it, including WND's excellent documentary on The Harbinger; The Isaiah 9:10 Judgment. 8.) They have embarked on an all-out campaign against The Harbinger and Jonathan Cahn, and are in full throttle mode promoting their own book against it. 9.) They claim to have allowed Jonathan Cahn multiple chances to address their charges. I have spoken with Jonathan Cahn about this myself. I know the man, I have looked him right in the eye, and have asked him about this; whether or not it is true. It is not. I personally know Jonathan Cahn. I do not know these men, and it has become quite evident to me that their distrusting ways and duplicitous methods of attacking other Christians whom they disagree with doctrinally by hiding behind the mantle of "discernment" and "apologetics" is far short the of Biblical mark, though they can quote Scripture to justify what they have done. 10.) They have taken a bold yet un-Biblical approach to "discernment" by targeting a fellow believer - yes, Jonathan Cahn is a mainline born again believer in Israel's Messiah, and a firm apologist for the faith. 11.) Because two or three well trusted "discernment" ministries are at play, the deception is great, because it comes from a corner of Protestant Christianity that many Christians have respected and supported through the years. It has become a veritable Trojan Horse within the very Body of Christ, to sow division and derision between Christians. 12.) They charge The Harbinger and Jonathan Cahn with sowing division in the Body, yet The Harbinger and Jonathan Cahn's teachings came long before the current campaign of marginalization and misinformation they have embarked upon, and it wasn't until they created the controversy that the division began to arise. Therefore their charge that Cahn started the division is false and baseless by the evidence. 13.) They (Eric Douma) have used Aristotelian Logic mixed with Cessationist/Hyper-Dispensational Theology as their hermeneutic to criticize Cahn's teachings and his book. 14.) Because of this, their premise, their analysis based upon this premise, and their conclusions are all incorrect, and I will (Lord willing) make this plain in the book I am currently at work on and will publish in due time as the Lord wills. 15.) One other thing the critics of The Harbinger have done is accuse Jonathan Cahn of Supersessionism (also known as Replacement Theology), because they confuse Cahn’s mention of the Pilgrim’s belief in America as a new kind of “Land of Promise” – a “New Israel,” and in their Compact – the Pilgrim’s own Covenantal declaration for God’s blessings upon the land and its inhabitants as long as they keep His commandments and honor Him as their God, and George Washington’s own Covenantal affirmation for God’s blessings upon the new nation, speaking as its leader (as Solomon did when he dedicated the Temple in Jerusalem); both as being a type of their own version of covenant relationship with the Almighty, and therefore because Cahn mentions this in his book , the critics of The Harbinger accuse him of Replacement Theology. Jonathan Cahn has never taught Supersessionism, and has in fact been a critic of it wherever its reared its ugly Anti-Semitic head. Thank you, Jose J. Bernal Arise & Shine Academy Beth Israel Jerusalem Center
  5. An FYI for those who wish to know about The Harbinger, I am in the process of reading it, and the book criticizing it The Harbinger: Fact or Fiction, and have posted some of my observations. I am working on a book of my own from my own examination of the relevant material and plan to publish it in due time, Lord willing. I will keep everyone posted on this.
  6. Welcome everyone. May I suggest that you navigate to The Pepster's Post: a Voice in Cyberspace for more information on The Harbinger and its critics. I am examining Pastor Eric Douma's meassage titled, Can the Bible Mean What It Never Meant, and would warn those who've not listened to it yet of the following that he employs: 1.) Eric is applying Aristotalian Logic to the Bible regarding to create a premise that does not exist - that Cahn claims to be a prophet. I know Jonathan Cahn personally for over ten years; he has never made this claim. He does not make it in his book. 2.) Eric Douma claims that Cahn is revealing new revelation, because of his use of the word "mystery" and "secret" and other such words, and therefore since he is not a prophet, Douma infers, Cahn cannot reveal secrets. Pastor Douma misses the point; Jonathan Cahn is not claiming new revelation, nor is he claiming to be a prophet, and his use of the words he employs is in the context of God revealing through His Holy Spirit the knowledge of what His Word teaches, what is already contained in the written word - Sola Sciptura. When Cahn employs such words as "mystery" and others like "secret", he is doing it in context of 1Corinthians 2. To the unsaved the Bible is a closed book and its context, mysteries and secrets. Some websites in complete ignorance of the facts have accused Cahn of being a Gnostic, or a Kabbalist, or even worse a false prophet because he has often used Extra-Biblical literature such as the writings of the rabbis to help illustrate the fact that even hostile witnesses within Judaism unknowingly support the truth of the Bible. He's even been accused wrongly of elevating the writings of the rabbis to that of the Holy Scriptures and the rabbis to the status of the prophets. Absolute hyperole and nonsense. Like many of the finest Bible schoars and teachers of our times have done themselves; he uses historical, archeological, and the writings of the rabbis to help illustrate and support what the Bible says. I am working on an effective rebuttal to Eric Douma's broad generalizations and wrong conclusions at the moment and will post it on The Pepster's Post: a Voice in Cyberspace in due time, Lord willing. But, I would suggest to everyone here to be very discerning, because there is much falsehoods being spoken about The Harbinger from the critic's circle, and as yet I have not noticed any references here to Joseph Farrah's web site at World Net Daily, nor have I noticed Dr. Michael Brown's website as one recommended for further reading on The Harbinger; only those sites which come from a Dispensation Theology and one of extreme Cessationsim, which forms the foundation of the critics hermeneutics and their misunderstandings.
×
×
  • Create New...