Before I began writing my review of The Harbinger by Jonathan Cahn,
I researched other reviews and got a surprise. I found several sources
analyzing the accuracy of Cahn’s proposed Isaiah 9:10 Effect and criticizing
Cahn’s argument that it applies to modern-day America as much as it did to
ancient Israel. I also found reviewers who praised the book as a wake-up call
for America. So I asked myself, “Why are the reviews so extreme?” Ordinarily we
might expect a small variation of opinion about a book; it’s okay or it’s good.
Maybe a one-star difference in overall rating. But these responses are radically
different, more passionately argued with long statements about inaccuracies of
facts and quality of argument. So I questioned whether I had read a
philosophical argument or …what?
I went back to the beginning of the book to search for
clues. Prior to the table of contents of The
Harbinger, Cahn tells us that what we are about to read is a story which contains real information. I
was instantly reminded of Aesop’s Fables. Even though each fable is
make-believe, the morality associated with the fable is real. So we accept
these morality tales, even though they contain talking animals, simply because
they are teaching us something
about real life. Who can forget that the tortoise’s slow, steady progress
allows him to win a race with an overly confident, very fast hare? So if The Harbinger is a modern-day fable, why
are so many reviewers complaining about argument quality and fact accuracy?
Perhaps the answer is in the presentation. Cahn formats the
story as a Socratic argument: a dialogue about a philosophical idea. The main
character, Nouriel Kaplan, relays his story – through dialogue - to a
well-known, yet unnamed news reporter. Within Kaplan’s story is another story -
also told totally in the dialogue between Kaplan and the Prophet – about how he
anonymously receives an ancient seal with Paleo-Hebrew inscriptions and begins a
quest to unravel its mystery. The set-up is good for a philosophical argument
and yet Cahn doesn’t use it in that manner. Kaplan parrots everything the
Prophet says and, likewise, the Reporter recaps everything Kaplan says. There
is no opposing point of view and no argument ensues to persuade the reader that
what is being said is either accurate or right. As a Socratic argument, the
book falls far short of the mark. However, The
Harbinger is NOT a philosophical argument. That’s not the purpose of the
dialogue or the story within story use of repetition.
The purpose of the duel dialogues is so the information
about the nine harbingers and their relationship between the downfall of
ancient Israel and post-9/11 America can be repeated numerous times. As an
educator, I know that most people must hear something at least five times
before they remember it. Well, Cahn is using repetition of key information so
the majority of readers will internalize it. It is the morality of the story
that is the theme, NOT the correctness of his supposition. It is the warning
that America is morally off-track and, as such, at risk of further humiliation,
violence and defeat.
I gave The Harbinger
a five-star, two-thumbs-up, must-read book based on perceiving it as a fable, a
twenty-first century morality tale drawing parallels between ancient Israel’s
pride with its fall and America’s arrogance prior to and since the terrorists
acts of 9/11 with our possible future demise. Not unlike the warning in
Proverbs 16:18 about pride going before a fall or Aesop’s arrogant hare losing
the race to tortoise. But I’ve just skimmed the information in the book, which
draws logical conclusions from compelling historical events... allowing for
some flexibility. Don’t take my word for it. Read it and be enlightened. Read
it and weep. Read it and change your own moral standing…and possibly our
nation’s overall morality. The choice is yours. Just read it and draw your own
conclusions.