Several instances of the altar’s power affecting people or nations are throughout the book. For samples, he writes of the later excavation “when the Throne of Satan was unearthed, everything was set in motion … That which was holding back the power of darkness was removed … unleashed upon the world” (page 30); and a “mystic bond to Satan’s Throne” for a certain political movement on page 179. And, he seems to play both sides of the card – at times it sounds as if the altar itself or Satan through the altar takes the initiative to take over a nation or person, while other times it is the people leaving God and choosing to do evil that turns the nation or person: “Neither of them had to be, … They chose it” (page 173). So, it isn’t the altar power? Or is it? – “when they lost the Altar, it meant .. the lifting of evil. When the Altar was removed, the shadow .. removed with it” (page 262). The ancient altar fell into disuse and burial due to people converting in the earlier church, but it was rediscovered nearly 2,000 years later in 1871 by a German explorer and later relocated to a museum (pages 37, 41, 92). The altar seems to carry power, sounding talismanic. He explains on page 38, “After centuries of lying in the dust, the Throne of Satan would be uncovered. It would ultimately lead to the Altar’s unearthing and to its being moved to another land … in its unearthing, the Altar would be taken apart, piece by piece .. then be reconstructed in another land .. What would it mean to move the Throne of Satan? .. It would mean that a new land would become the center of his workings in the world … the land that received the Throne of Satan would also receive his kingdom … a modern nation ruled by the ancient evil … possessed by the resurrected evil.”
Page 102 has, “the Altar of Pergamon is also called the Throne of Satan ..” But, the Revelation text does not directly mention the famed altar in Pergamum that Cahn focuses on (it may be referring to the city as the throne). Nor does the text propound the mystical idea that mystical powers flow from the city or altar that could affect people born near it, or would change national / worldwide events as Cahn maintains (see below). On page 95, the mystical power of the altar contaminates human custodians, because the Lord of the Rings movie says so: “Sounds like something out of The Lord of the Rings … The one who possesses the ring becomes possessed by it. Yes .. except .. what happened to .. the world was real.” And, evil power is emanating from the altar because the Indiana Jones movie says so on page 57: “Sounds like an Indiana Jones movie … an ancient object connected to the supernatural … In the movie, .. the Ark of the Covenant struck down the evil … but the Altar is joined to the bringing forth of evil.” Page 58 – “Again, like a movie … They disturb an ancient object, and an ancient curse is unleashed.” Further, Cahn maintains, perhaps without realizing it, that humans have the ability to block that Satanic power by burying the throne in the ground. Thus, Satan’s power is limited by or controlled by a structure built by humans, and whether or not humans decide to display the structure. If humans decide to move the altar to another location, then the mystical, Satanic altar power is also transferred to and infects that location, as well: “What would you expect to happen when you unearth and transfer the Throne of Satan? … something dark to be set in motion … The nation that received the Altar would undergo a transformation, a metamorphosis. Its inhabitants would be subject to a dark phenomenon ..” (pages 38-9).
Do you really think that’s what these verses in Revelation intended for the meaning? In the New Testament, you do not find Jesus or the apostles warning about mystical, evil power in relics or charms and then the power transferring to a nation or affecting a person who has custody or are born near it. In Isaiah 44:9-18 crafted works in idolatry are presented and denounced as man-made objects and worthless, not as projecting mystical power (cf. 37:19; 40:20). Recall the showdown between Elijah and the prophets of Baal at their altar in 1 Kings 18:18-39: no mystical power. It sounds more and more like Cahn is borrowing from occultism or astrology to overexplain / misexplain the Revelation verses; compare Deut 18:10. On page 188, there is a national leader “whose birth was especially connected to the Altar’s return,” because he was born in a year related to the altar rediscovery in the later 19th century, or “came into the world just as they began to unearth the altar … had come into the world with the Altar.” So, the leader is thus “destined to possess it .. Or .. to be possessed by it.” Now it’s starting to sound like a newspaper horoscope. Another national leader was conceived the same year the altar’s “first reconstruction was begun .. in 1888 .. the year of the Altar’s conception” on page 65. So, “They were both conceived together. As the Altar was being pieced together and formed” so, too, was the national leader “formed in his mother’s womb” (page 66). And, the initial work of the altar reconstruction was completed in 1889, the same year the leader was born. Thus, they were obviously meant for each other. Is the altar of Pergamum an astrology sign? It can determine a person’s destiny? You do not find this type of year of birth linkage-destiny concoction in the Scripture. Are other people born in that time frame and area also destined to be possessed by the altar / Satan?
The Revelation verse section actually sounds like more of derision, just a derisive remark (similar to saying that your problem child is the spawn of Satan); an expression or figure of speech. The verse may not even be referring to the altar of Pergamum individually, but rather to the city itself generally. The city of Pergamum held a center of polytheism, which the church would have considered ungodly (pages 28, 60). And, the Book of Revelation is “not” known for mixing in symbolic wording, either: at 2:16, the narrator appears to say his mouth is a sword, and 2:17 mentions manna will be given to those who remain faithful (manna is from the time of Moses, about 1400 years before this verse). Those are not considered literal for some reason. But, when a polytheistic central city is derided as Satan’s throne, that must be considered literal. That’s where Satan literally lives, in the city of Pergamum (!). Actually, if you’ve seen the altar of Pergamon today in the museum (see youtube) it’s not the ugliness you would expect for something where Satan resides – it has rather fine, marble-looking work. But, Cahn takes it and overblows it as literal. “With the Throne’s unearthing and transference, its ancient darkness would be unleashed upon the world” (page 58).
Readers from Germany may not be too impressed with this book – Cahn identifies Berlin as “the city of the Throne” of Satan on page 94 (cf. 96, 118, 153), the “capital of evil” on page 187. When the altar was re-exposed the next evil nation started, Germany in the late 19th century (pages 42, 95). When Germany joined the European Union, of course, the altar power was transferred to them, as well (pages 263-4). Even worse, the power of the altar now extends to the entire world by chain link to Europe (page 281), resulting in a future one-world state for a “resurrected Roman Empire” (pages 263, 276, 278). (can someone please cover the altar in dirt again to block its power again? dirt stops Satan somehow) But, nothing is mentioned in his book about the State invention of Islam in the 7th century when the altar of Pergamum was still buried in the ground. Maybe the start of Islam is not mentioned because it undermines Cahn’s premise. The empire of Islam was an ancient world power that imposed havoc on the known world by the sword for centuries, but the altar “power” was still blocked by dirt at that time. “Germany, having been born with the Throne, would now begin transforming into the kingdom [of Satan] … Through Germany he [Satan] would bring war to the earth .. death and destruction to millions … And it all began in 1871, the year of the Altar’s discovery and its first unearthing” (page 42). But, so did Islam long before the re-exposed altar. The evil empire of Islam started and conquered others well before the altar was unearthed. The altar “power” concoction of Cahn doesn’t fit.
And, dirt itself seems to be rather powerful. Eventually, the altar became buried in the ground from disuse, and that stopped Satan’s power since it was covered in dirt (say, what?): “.. what would the disappearance of Satan’s Throne mean for the world? It would mean that the power of the Enemy would be restrained. There would, of course, be evil, as there always was. But it was no longer the reigning power. It would no longer rule cultures and empires as it had in pagan times. The power of darkness, the dominion of the Evil One, would be restrained” (page 29). Further, “The first shovels broke the earth around the Altar in 1878 … As German archaeologists removed the dust from Satan’s Throne, the Satanic madness began to stir in their homeland. Germany … the ancient evil began officially germinating in its soil” (page 56). Why dirt is able to stop Satan is not explained in Cahn’s book. Why Satan was unable to blow away the dirt from on top of his throne so his power can flow again is also not explained. Satan can affect entire nations and world events, but he cannot sweep away a pile of dirt on himself in a city he is in control of. He couldn’t instruct his cohorts to remove that dirt, either? That’s some powerful dirt! The dirt is blocking Satan’s power; he isn’t strong enough to move dirt (or, couldn’t the power just flow through the dirt? that’s what heat does).
And, when the altar is rediscovered about 2,000 years later by a human explorer and the dirt is removed, then Satan’s power is unleashed again from the now re-exposed altar in modern Turkey – someone has removed the dirt that was blocking Satan’s power all that time. “What would happen if the Throne of Satan was uncovered, if someone were to dig it up? It would mean that the darkness would no longer be restrained .. the power of the Enemy would no longer be held back … the power of darkness would be unleashed on the world, the power to reign over kingdoms” (page 29). Now, Satan’s power is unleashed, again, because the dirt is removed off his throne. Then, the altar was dug up and moved to a museum in Berlin, Germany, which now becomes the new city of Satan, because that’s where his altar is now. And, that Satanic altar power being released again resulted in World War 1 and 2 happening (pages 72, 117). So, if someone had covered up the altar with dirt again that would have stopped World War 1 and 2? If dirt blocked Satan for 2,000 years, surely it can stop him again and prevent these world wars. Someone should have arranged to have several dump trucks filled with dirt to go to the museum and re-bury the altar of Pergamon in dirt to stop Satan again. That’s some powerful stuff, dirt!
Cahn has Satan as Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12 (cf. Ezekiel 28:14). Page 154 reads: “.. in the words of Lucifer, I will be like the Most High” (cf. pages 18, 19, 72, 153, 178, 237, 308). But, that is a common misunderstanding. If you read the Bible text itself it clearly says it’s referring to the king of Babylon at verse 4 of Isaiah in a negative way, and not Satan: “take up this proverb against the king of Babylon ..”; and verse 12 of the Ezekiel section clearly states “take up a lamentation for the king of Tyre, and say to him …” It’s simply portraying the arrogance of earthly kings in a figurative way. Satan is never referred to as Lucifer in the Scripture; the term was not even meant to be a name. In addition, “lucifer” is not even a correct translation of the Hebrew term (heylel / helel); it’s a gloss from the Latin Vulgate: “heylel: a masculine noun meaning morning star .. (Lucifer, shining one, is from the Latin Vulgate’s translation ..) (Isa. 14:12)” ( - The Complete Word Study Dictionary: Old Testament, 2003, page 263; co-writer: Eugene Carpenter, Ph.D.). The Greek term for morning star is applied to Jesus in a good way in Rev 2:28: 22:16; 2 Pet 1:19. The Hebrew New Testament appears to use the same or similar Hebrew words as found in Isaiah 14:12 for those 3 verses about Jesus (see Hebrew Letters: James-Revelation, 2023; co-translator: Al Garza). Obviously, it’s not the name of a being, but rather a description that can be used for good or bad, depending on how it’s used. “LUCIFER .. Latin word meaning ‘light-bearing’ ..” ( - The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 2008, Vol. 3, page 719). “LUCIFER Appellation from a Latin word meaning ‘light bearer’ … The Hebrew expression was probably never meant to be a name ..” ( - Tyndale Bible Dictionary, 2001, page 829). “In Isaiah 14:12, ‘Day Star’ is a designation for the haughty king of Babylon .. who, having aspired so high at the cost of Israel, will surely be brought down by God” (ibid., page 363). “In Isa 14:12, the traditional ‘Lucifer’ glosses [the Hebrew] helel ben-sahar, bearer of light (‘morning star,’ ‘son of the dawn’ …” ( - New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, 1997, Vol. 2, page 942; general editor: Willem VanGemeren, Ph.D.).
Page 1 reads, “The mystery chose me. I have no choice but to reveal it.” And, Cahn has as part of this special knowledge the location of the Jewish Temple misidentified. Page 308 reads, “the Throne of God .. in Jerusalem, on the Temple Mount, the sanctuary of God … God was worshipped on the mount of the congregation, the Temple Mount” (cf. pages 313-314). Cahn also connects the Temple Mount to prophetic fulfillment on page 313: “The Temple Mount .. the focal point of the cosmic war … the Antichrist. It is prophesied that he will come here to the Temple Mount and desecrate it.” And, he appears to be saying the Muslim Dome of the Rock presently on the Temple Mount helps fulfill Isaiah 14:13 where Satan allegedly says he will sit on the mount of God, because the Dome has an image of Satan on it (page 314) (how do you know what Satan looks like?). Many people refer to that location, as well; it’s the commonly used explanation presently. If you go to Jerusalem today, they will point you there for the Temple. But, does the Biblical description support this location for the Jewish Temple? The information in the Scripture is usually not consulted about this in popular understanding, unfortunately – beware of tour misguides and travel misguides, as well! If you think about it, wouldn’t the Holy Temple be in the Holy City? It’s the Holy City! At the Temple dedication, 1 Kings 8:1 says the City of David is the Holy City or political and religious capital (Zion) (also 2 Sam 5:7; 2 Chron. 5:2), which is the original walled Jerusalem before Jerusalem expanded to the later size (2 Samuel 5:9; 1 Chron. 11:4, 5, 7, 8); the City of David is in the southeast corner of modern Jerusalem. The problem is that the misnamed Temple Mount is not in the Holy City, it’s about 600 feet away from the City of David (this would also mean the popular location for Mount Moriah is misidentified).
There are clues in the Bible that the Temple was in the City of David. As the Holy City, the City of David seems to be the place for holy buildings (-notice the holy correlation). The Ark of the Covenant was put into a Tabernacle in the City of David before Temple construction (1 Chron. 15:1, 25, 29; 16:1; 1 Kings 8:4), and then placed into the Temple when it was completed (1 Kings 8:6, 21) – the context for this event is the City of David in 1 Kings 8. And, Solomon kept his wife in the City of David until the temple was completed there in 1 Kg 3:1. After the Temple was built (2 Chron 7:11), it becomes clear that 1 Kg 3:1 is referring to the City of David for the place where his wife was kept AND where the temple was to be built: she went out of the City of David in 1 Kg 9:24 when the temple completed – the house for Solomon’s wife could be built in general Jerusalem since the ark did not reside there, but her house was not allowed in the City of David as that part was considered holy due to the ark’s presence (2 Chron 8:11) – that’s where the ark was, in the Temple (1 Kings 8:20, 21). Outside the City of David her house could be built as the ark did not reside outside the City of David; the ark was in the City of David making the city holy – she was gentile. At that time the ark was in the Temple. Zion could be referred to as Jerusalem in general (Psalm 76:2; Neh 11:1) after the Temple, but specifically it was the City of David part of Jerusalem. The misnamed Temple Mount fits better as a Roman fortress, which explains why part of the “Temple Mount” wall still stands today (the Western Wall). They would not have destroyed their own Roman building. The Scripture says the sacred “buildings” (plural) of the Temple are to be destroyed. No Jewish buildings were to be left standing (Mat 24:2; Mark 13:1, 2).
The ark was “brought up” from the City (and out for a large celebration), then put into the Temple in 1 Kg 8:4, but the Hebrew term can mean “to lift” (- AMG’s Comprehensive Dictionary of Old Testament Words, 2016, pages 751-2). “Up” isn’t necessarily a geographic elevation. In 2 Samuel 6:2-4 the ark was brought “up” from a hill and placed into a house elsewhere (verses 10, 11) – it would have to go down the hill to get to the house. Joshua 3:6 says “take up the ark” to cross a river. I get the impression that “bring up” is just referring to the ark was gathered from its resting place – it was “brought up” off the floor.
Page 320 has Mt Sinai at the traditional, undersized location on the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt. A sacred location he was sent to for writing this book on pages 322-3, 332. Space shortage permits me to mention only that there is a much stronger Sinai candidate in northwestern Saudi Arabia. Recommend book: Exodus Route Restored: Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Exodus, by Steven Rudd. Links: realmountsinai.com ancientexodus.com splitrockresearch.org
For a better understanding of the church as presented in the Bible (instead of what is commonly referred to as church today), recommend books on Amazon: A Study of Denominations by Ethan Longhenry; and Churches of the New Testament by Ethan Longhenry; and Handbook on Church Doctrines by Dr. Stafford North. Recommend sites: bible.ca wvbs.org onestone.com truthbooks.com
Recommend books on “Bible Prophecy”: A Case for Amillennialism by Kim Riddlebarger; and Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative by Sam Storms; and The Last Days Identified by Don K. Preston.
No comments:
Post a Comment