The Harbinger, page 12
“A joint resolution expressing the sense of the Senate and the House of Representatives regarding the terrorist attacks launched against the United States on September 11, 2001.1
“The clerk continued the reading of the resolution, a condemnation of the attacks, an expression of condolences, and then a call for unity, a war against terrorism, and the punishment of those responsible for the attack and all who assisted them.”
“That would all be expected,” I said.
“It would be,” said the prophet. “But then the Senate majority leader began his address. At the end of the speech would come the climax. These are the words proclaimed by the Senate majority leader on Capitol Hill, the morning after 9/11, to present and sum up the nation’s response to the calamity. Listen . . .
“I know that 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 like 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.2
“I was speechless for several moments. I don’t know what I expected to hear, but what I heard left me without words and with my heart racing. I was completely stunned. The ancient vow had actually been proclaimed to the nation from Capitol Hill—the vow of fallen bricks and sycamores had echoed through the halls of the United States Congress, and all on the morning after 9/11.”
“How?” I asked. “How could that have happened?”
“How could it have happened with the vice presidential candidate, or with the stone or the tree? How could any of it have happened? It had to happen, and so it did.”
“But he was identifying America as a nation under judgment.”
“Yes, unwittingly.”
“The majority leader of the United States Senate was publicly pronouncing judgment on America.”
“Blindly,” he replied, “having no idea what he was pronouncing. As far as he knew, he was only delivering an inspiring speech.”
“But unknowingly playing his part in a prophetic mystery.”
“Yes . . . and so the words of the ancient vow were now officially joined to America and 9/11. And just as Isaiah’s recording of the vow transformed it into a matter of national record and a prophetic word for all the people, so now the same words were now officially recorded in the Annals of Congress as a matter of national record.”
“But the Senate majority leader wasn’t a prophet.”
“No.”
“But you said it’s a prophecy. How can someone who isn’t a prophet bring forth a prophetic word?”
“In the Gospel of John,” he replied, “the eleventh chapter, the high priest Caiaphas is recorded as saying, ‘It is necessary that one man should die for the people.’ It was the beginning of the plot that would end with the crucifixion of the Messiah. But it was something else as well. It was also a prophecy, namely, that one man, Jesus, would die for the people, to save them. Caiaphas wasn’t a prophet. He was an ungodly man, and yet he prophesied. It wasn’t the man—it was the office he held. He was speaking, as the Gospel puts it, ‘not of his own initiative,’ but prophesying by virtue of his office, as the chief representative of the nation.”
“So the Senate majority leader was prophesying by virtue of his office?”
“The Senate majority leader was the highest representative of America’s highest representative body. By virtue of that office, he became the instrument to represent the nation, to speak on its behalf, to give voice to its response, and to deliver a prophetic word.”
“So someone can prophesy without being a prophet. How does that happen?”
“The word is inspiration. When a prophet speaks, he does so under the inspiration of the Spirit. But prophets aren’t the only ones who can speak or act under inspiration. The Bible itself is called the inspired Word of God because it was written by those under the inspiration of God’s Spirit—not only by prophets. Even those who have no idea what they’re doing or saying, even those who act and speak from other motives, as did Caiaphas, even a politician, well-meaning or not, may speak under the inspiration of God.”
“Inspiration,” I said. “Didn’t he use that word in the speech?”
“He did. He said, ‘I know that there is only the smallest measure of inspiration that can be taken from this devastation.’3 He used it to introduce the prophecy.”
“But he didn’t intend to use it that way.”
“Of course not. He used it to mean this is for the purpose of inspiring you. But the word means more than that, even in its most literal definition. Inspiration, from the Latin inspiratio, means to be in-breathed or blown upon.”
“Blown upon by . . . ?”
“By the wind . . . by the breath . . . by the Spirit. That which is inspired is God-breathed, Spirit-blown. The word is defined as, ‘a supernatural or divine influence upon the prophets, the apostles, and the sacred writers, or upon men, to enable them to communicate divine truth.’”
“So the word has a double meaning.”
“Yes, just as the prophetic words of Caiaphas had a double meaning. That which he intended to say and that which he didn’t. What he didn’t intend—that was the prophecy. So too with the Senate majority leader; the message he intended to say was ‘the following words are going to inspire you.’”
“And that’s how most people would have understood it.”
“Yes,” said the prophet, “but then there was the message he didn’t intend to say, which was this: The following words do not come from my own initiative but are of divine origin, the same origin and influence by which the prophets spoke. What you’re about to hear is a prophetic message.”
“So even the word inspiration came forth by inspiration.”
“Yes, that, as well as the prophetic address.”
“What do you mean?” I asked.
“When you send a letter, you address it, you identify the one to whom it’s being sent. So too biblical prophecies often contain prophetic addresses, introductions identifying the one or ones to whom it’s being sent. It’s there in Isaiah’s prophecy: ‘The Lord has sent forth a word to Jacob . . . Israel . . . Ephraim . . . Samaria . . . all the people.’ So the prophecy is addressed to the people of Jacob, Israel, and Samaria. But now the same prophecy, the same message, is about to be given . . . prophetically sent, to a different people, and a different nation.”
“America.”
“Yes.”
“So then it has to be readdressed. The prophetic address has to be changed.”
“Exactly,” he said. “And so it was. The majority leader omitted the original prophetic address that identified Israel as its recipient and put a different one in its place:
“There is a passage in the Bible, from Isaiah that I think speaks to all of us at times like this.4
“Again, it’s a message of two realms and double meaning. What the speaker meant to say was this: ‘There’s a passage in the Bible to bring comfort in times of crisis like this.’ And, of course, the Bible is filled with countless passages of comfort and encouragement . . . ”
“But Isaiah 9:10 was not one of them.”
“No,” said the prophet, “not by a very long shot.”
“So what he didn’t mean to say . . . ”
“What he didn’t mean to say, but actually said, was this: ‘There’s a message from Scripture now given and speaking to America. The message is a prophetic word of warning, sent to a nation that once knew God, and appointed to be given and to speak at this particular time—the time when a nation is standing in danger of judgment.’ And then, after proclaiming the ancient vow, the Senate majority leader added on his own words:
“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.5
“That is what we will do . . . just six words, but all that was needed to transform the vow. No longer was it an ancient vow of an ancient people. No longer was it merely a quotation. It was now the vow itself. It was now the vowing. The we of ancient Israel had transformed into the we of America. The act of national defiance was taking place not in the ancient capital of an ancient kingdom; it was now transpiring on Capitol Hill in Washington DC. The ancient judgment drama was now playing itself out on the floor of the United States Senate. And then the Senate majority leader brought it to its logical conclusion:
“That is what we will do. We will rebuild and we will recover.6
“It was the final restating of the vow. ‘That is what we will do.’ In other words, ‘America will do exactly as ancient Israel had done in its days of judgment.’”
“Which is . . . ”
“The word that, as in ‘That is what we will do,’ can only refer to the ancient vow. In other words, America would continue in its defiance of God, in its departure from His ways, in its refusing to hear His call to return—only it would do so all the more. America would follow the course of the ancient vow.”
“So Isaiah 9:10 is now being transformed into national policy.”
“You could say that.”
“And what happened after the vow was spoken?” I asked.
“Everyone was in full agreement,” he replied.
“They had no idea what it was they had just heard.”
“No. They had no idea what had happened, that what had gone forth from Capitol Hill was the proclamation that identifies a nation in rebellion against God and the pronouncement of judgment upon that nation.”
“And what happened after that?”
“What happened after that . . . After that, it would all come true. It was a prophecy. It foretold the nation’s future course. ‘That is what we will do.’ America would choose the same course as that of ancient Israel, enact the same strategy, and walk in the same footsteps. It was all prophesied on the very morning after 9/11.”
“He spoke of the cutting down of the tree. Did he know there was an actual tree cut down by the calamity at Ground Zero and that it bore the same name as the fallen tree of Isaiah 9:10?”
“No. He had no idea. His version translated it as fig tree. Nevertheless, it was the biblical shakam, the fig-mulberry tree, the sycamore. And even if he had known what he was saying, what it all meant, he could have had no idea that it was actually being fulfilled. When he proclaimed the prophecy on September 12, Ground Zero was still a disaster site and cut off from the public. And it was only in later days that the story of the Sycamore of Ground Zero would come out. And yet he spoke of it. Nor could he have known on September 12 that one day a crane would lower a twenty-ton Gazit Stone onto Ground Zero where the fallen bricks had laid. That would come true three years after he foretold it.”
“And the cedar tree,” I said. “There’s no way he could have known that a tree matching the biblical Erez Tree would actually be planted in place of the fallen Sycamore.”
“That too would only happen years later . . . and only because someone decided to donate that particular tree. He couldn’t have had any idea, and yet he prophesied it, that the one would be planted in place of the other. It was all prophesied the day after 9/11. It was all there, and recorded in the Annals of Congress, for the whole nation to know. The nation would respond to its calamity just as ancient Israel had responded to its calamity. It would pursue a course of defiance on a path of judgment.”
I was silent. The prophet paused before saying anything more, allowing me time to process what I was hearing before showing me something else.
“Come, Nouriel. I want to you to see something.” He led me to the other side of the Capitol and pointed to a nearby building.
“Do you know what that is?”
“I feel I should.”
“What you’re looking at is the Supreme Court—the highest court in the land. And yet there sits a much higher court than this by which nations are judged. According to biblical requirement, before a truth can be established or a judgment passed in a court of law, the matter must be confirmed by two witnesses:
“One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established.7
“The principle of two witnesses applies first to the legal realm. But it can also be applied to the realm of nations. In the case of America, the Isaiah 9:10 connection would, likewise, be established by two witnesses.”
“The Senate majority leader on the day after 9/11 . . . he was the first witness.”
“Correct . . . And the second witness?”
“The vice presidential candidate three years later on the anniversary of 9/11. Both would speak the same words.”
“Correct. And both would bear witness of the joining of America to ancient Israel and of 9/11 to Isaiah 9:10—the one speaking of what would be and the other of what was . . . that the vow was being fulfilled.”
“And neither of the two,” I added, “had any idea what they were saying, or what the other was saying, or how their words were actually being fulfilled in reality.”
“No,” said the prophet, “which only further compounds the weight of their testimony.”
“And it was all set in motion on the very day after 9/11 . . . here . . . with a warning . . . and the pronouncement of judgment. The prophecy was proclaimed to the nation from Capitol Hill . . . and it would all come true.”
• • •
There was silence. The revelation of the Ninth Harbinger was finished . . . and I was still shaken. This obscure . . . mysterious prophecy . . . had actually been proclaimed from the seat of the American government, and the speaker linked it all to 9/11. That, together with everything else—all the connections, all the twists and quirks, the reenactments, the replaying, the ancient mystery manifesting in America—it left me shaken. I wanted to be silent, to try to take it all in. But I had the sense that if I didn’t say something soon, he’d be gone, and it would be the end. It was the last Harbinger. So I broke the silence.
“I have a question.”
“Yes.”
“If America is following the same pattern as ancient Israel, witnessing the same signs, uttering the same words, reenacting the same acts, responding with the same response . . . ”
“Yes . . . ?”
“How can it escape suffering the same fate?”
He didn’t answer. So again I spoke.
“And if the proclaiming of the vow was just the first stage of judgment for Israel, and not the last, then what about America? What does the future hold?”
Chapter 14 There Comes a Second
Again the prophet was silent, and he gazed out into the expanse of the Washington Mall, appearing to be preoccupied.
“This was the last Harbinger,” I said, trying to get his attention. “What’s next?”
“What’s next?”
“What happens now?” I asked. “What does it all lead to?”
“The Harbingers are signs of what, Nouriel?”
“Of warning.”
“And of what else?”
“The rejection of the warning.”
“And what’s the purpose of a warning?”
“To prevent something from happening . . . a threat, a danger.”
“So what happens if a warning is given, if the alarms go off, and nobody listens?”
“Then it happens.”
“So then it happens.”
“But does it have to happen?” I asked.
“If the warning is rejected, then, yes, it has to happen.”
“But people can change, and a nation can alter its course.”
“Yes. That’s the hope. That’s the purpose of a warning. A changed course means a changed end. But an unchanged course means an unchanged end. Then it has to happen.”
“As it did to ancient Israel?”
“Each case is unique. But the overall progression is the same.”
“So if America’s course doesn’t change . . . then what? Another 9/11?”
“Another 9/11 could be . . . or a different 9/11. Or was 9/11 itself a harbinger?”
“And what does that mean?” I asked.
“The first Assyrian invasion of Israel was a calamity in and of itself. But at the same time, it was a harbinger of a still greater calamity to come, a warning of the nation’s destruction. A calamity can also be a warning.”
“But what would 9/11 be a harbinger of?”
“It was the day of falling symbols. But what is the fall of a symbol?” he asked.
“I have no idea,” I replied.
“Is it not also the symbol of a fall?”
“I’m not getting it.”
“But you will.”
“So first the warning’s given, and then a final calamity.”
“More than one warning may be given,” said the prophet. “If one alarm is ignored, then there comes a second.”
“Then there comes a second, or there may come a second?”
“Then there comes a second.”
“Then a second warning is coming?” I asked.
“A second warning,” he said, “a second alarm . . . a second shaking.”
“A second shaking of America?”
He turned his gaze so that he was now looking directly into my eyes as he gave his response.
“There comes a second,” he said again.
Then he handed me a seal. It was the same one I had just given him back.
“The seal of the Ninth Harbinger? I just returned it to you.”
“Yes,” he replied.
Then he began descending the Capitol steps. I followed after him. But hearing my footsteps, he stopped and turned around. “No, Nouriel,” he said. “That was the last Harbinger. Our time is finished.”
