The Dating of Revelation

The Dating of Revelation

Live from Salt Lake City, Utah, this is Heart of the Matter, where we do all we can to try and worship God in Spirit and in Truth. And I’m Shawn McCraney, your host. Show 16 442 The Dating of Revelation, April 21st, 2015.

We are getting excited about Brother Matt Slick coming to be with us on Tuesday Night, May 5th, for a two-hour HOTM special. Matt is founder of CARM and will address Calvinism then field questions. The format will be non-confrontational, but we will talk at length about the Calvinist presentation of Christianity and my questions about it. Tuesday, May 5th, from 8-10 pm right here in the HOTM studio/church. If you want to be here live, please join us. We will serve refreshments and libations.

Okay – we have a very important topic to cover that sort of fell on us last week from a caller. Before we get into it, let’s have a word of prayer.

When we first started doing the program on live television here in Utah, we had funding from Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa which paid for my flights to and from Southern California until I graduated from the school of Ministry. Always wanting to make sure they have a handle on where their support is going, I had two different men who sat on the board there approach me and say: “You know, you’re doing live television and time is precious – cut out the prayer at the beginning. We can all assume you did your praying before the show started.” I remember feeling some anger for this attitude because I did not see this as a perfunctory act but an act to unite viewers' hearts and my heart to God. And that communication and reliance on God, above everything else, was paramount. I heard their request – but continued to pray at the first of every show. We lost the Calvary Chapel funding but have yet to lose the support of God. Anyway, let’s begin with a prayer.

Understanding Christianity Today

We have been really getting into how to see and understand Christianity today – as it relates to how it started, what the Bible says, and how to use and see the Scripture. Is there a church that Jesus is going to come back and rapture, or did that already happen? While not a hill to die on – after all, what we believe relative to this does NOT alter the fact that we are still here and men have been attempting to play church for nearly two thousand years – but if the preterist view is correct, it will go a long way in helping Christians today to approach the faith and the day-to-day focus in a new and living way rather than through what has been attempted in the past. Last week our final caller, I think his name was David from Salt Lake City, made a number of claims in an effort to confront my preterist views.

The Core Argument: Dating of Revelation

First, he said that my whole argument rests on the dating of scripture which, according to him, has almost been unitedly decided upon by even the most conservatively minded scholars to have been well after 70 AD. I replied that the scholars I consider saw things very differently. We then started in on the Book of Revelation, which is really the core argument relative to dating (though David nor the scholars he speaks to might disagree) because many scholars have suggested that it was certainly written in 95 AD – well after the destruction of Jerusalem. David emphatically suggested that “my whole argument” (for preterism and the way I think believers ought to read and see the Bible today) hinged on the dating of the New Testament books. A couple of things on this before we get to how we can clearly see the dating of Revelation was pre 70 AD. Firstly, the dating of all the New Testament books is a debatable issue. And it is doubtful we will ever agree on the subject. Because of this, I would suggest the dating debates have little to do with my views – and instead, I would suggest the content of the New Testament books (what is said in them) and the context (to whom and where the things were said) and the secular history surrounding what was said is far more pressing on my stance than debatable datings.

Dating of the Book of Revelation

The dating of the single book of Revelation is very important to the preterist view – and here’s why: A preterist believes that the events of Revelation have occurred and a futurist believes that the events described in Revelation are still headed our way. If Revelation was written before 70AD it goes a long way to support the preterist position because we could at least say that the destruction of Jerusalem occurred AFTER it was written therefore supporting the idea that the Book was completed then. If Revelation was written even one day after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD then it obviously had nothing to do with Jerusalem’s destruction and therefore has application to a day in the future – as the futurists claim. In other words, if Revelations is dated early we easily have its fulfillment in God's judgment on Israel. If you date it late, you have ample evidence that things are not done and we had better maintain a pure physical church for Jesus to come back and get. I told David last week that it was not scholarly debates on historical evidences that prove the dating of Revelation but the contents of Revelation itself.

Early vs. Late Dating

So, there’s a later dating of Revelation (after 70 AD which was when Jerusalem was destroyed) and there’s the earlier dating (pre-70 AD). As mentioned last week, those who hold to the late dating of Revelation typically assign its authorship to be around 95-96 AD. This was a year when a man called Domitian Caesar reigned. And this dating was determined by the following statement by Irenaeus (AD 130 to AD 202), as quoted by Eusebius, the church historian, in AD 325: Note two things about this quote – it came from two men – one (Eusebius) in 325 AD quoting another (Irenaeus) who lived one hundred and twenty-three years earlier (who was speaking of an event that supposedly took place nearly two generations before that!). Here is Eusibius’ quote taken apparently from Irenaeus: "We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign."

Evidence from Revelation's Content

To add fuel to the disputable nature of this quote we ALSO have to note that Irenaeus did not witness this. He was referring to Polycarp (who, according to tradition knew the apostle John). Then, we are not sure if the "it" Polycarp was referring to was John, the visions he saw, the name of anti-christ, or the book itself. Also, we do not know if he meant that the book was written at that time or not. So, this single statement, which comes to us by three separate people separated by three centuries, is at best hearsay and is certainly unclear. And it is this statement alone, amidst all of this uncertainty, that serves as the evidence to support the "late date" theory of the dating of the Book. Tradition. I prefer to let the Bible tell me when the Book was written. So, let’s turn to the book itself and its contents to discover evidence for the dating of it. Some points are stronger than others.

POINT #1 “John must prophesy again” In Revelation 10:11 we read that John "must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings." If Revelation was written in AD 95-96, John would have been over ninety years old. In that day and age ninety was ancient and traveling was brutal. Not that God couldn’t have supported him but it typically would have been very difficult for him to travel to the various "nations and…many kings" and preach. However, with Revelation written earlier, John would have been in his mid 60's and at that age, his traveling would have been more reasonable.

POINT #2 The Seven Churches in Asia Chapter one verse four proves that John wrote Revelation to a specific group of churches in Asia. The importance of this statement cannot be overlooked (even though it has been by many scholars). There is only one small window of time in which there were only seven churches in Asia. The early AD 60's. The apostle Paul established nine churches in that area, but only seven were addressed in Revelation.

Revelation's Connection to Historical Events

Destroyed by an earthquake around AD 61, Laodicea was rebuilt soon afterwards, but the other two cities were not. This left only seven churches in Asia during the five years just prior to the beginning of the Roman/Jewish war. Of particular importance is the message to the church of Philadelphia found in Revelation 3:7-13. In verse's 10 and 11, Christ told John to inform them that an "hour of temptation" was "about to come upon all the world," (i.e., the Roman Empire GE not the KOSMOS). Christ then told them that He was coming quickly and that they should hold fast. The reason this is important (besides the fact that this was directed to an actual church in the first century) is that the first persecution of Christians took place under Nero Caesar in AD 64. Another reason Revelation could not have been written after 70 AD.

The Temple Was Still Standing

As mentioned last week one of the most compelling proofs that Revelation was written before Jerusalem was destroyed is the fact that the Jewish temple was still standing! Revelation 11:1-2 says: "And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." How do we know that this was the temple of the first century and not some future one? First, there is not one verse in the entire Bible that speaks of a "rebuilt" Jewish Temple. Not one. That alone should be proof enough. Nevertheless this passage is very similar to Luke 21:20-24. Notice that Jesus told the disciples that they would see this event. They had asked Him about their temple (verse 5), and Jesus told them it would be destroyed before their generation passed away (verse 32). Notice again what Jesus said in verse 24, "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles." This is the same thing Christ told John in Revelation 11:2! Therefore, since the disciples' generation has long since passed away, Revelation must have been written before the nations trampled Jerusalem under foot in AD 70.

The Tribes of the Earth

Most writers consider the theme of the book to be Revelation 1:7. It reads: Revelation 1:7, "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen." This verse is very similar in context to Matthew 24:30. Matthew 24:30, "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes (same Greek word as Revelation 1:7) of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." Standing alone this is not conclusive by any means but from it we can see that just based on the language, a case can be made that since Matthew 24:30 is a verse that speaks of “the fall of Jerusalem” and the Revelation verse (is very similar) we can suggest that they are speaking of the same thing – and therefore had to be written prior to the date of its fall. Also notice the language of Revelation 1:7. It refers to those who "pierced him." Although we know that the Romans crucified him and pierced him, the apostles accused the Jews of the act in Acts 2:23 and 36, Peter says that they crucified Jesus. Acts 3:15; 4:10; 5:30 says the same thing. Stephen, in Acts 7:51-52, calls the Jews murderers. Paul, in 1st Corinthians 2:8, speaks of the “Jews killing the Lord.” Again in I Thessalonians 2:14-15, Paul speaks of the Jews that killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets. From this we might suggest that the book itself concerns itself with the Jews, who, were utterly dispersed or killed in 70 AD. When Revelation 1:7 refers to all the "kindreds of the earth" ("kindreds" is from the Greek word phule, which means "tribe"). This is a direct allusion to the Jewish tribal system. Now, we must identify, from Scripture, who those "tribes" were. To do that, we must keep in mind this simple rule of interpreting the Bible: let Scripture interpret Scripture.

Revealing Jesus to First Century Israel

Zechariah 12:10-14, "And I will pour upon the…inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son…In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem…And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart; All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart." Obviously, this is the foundation for John's statement in Revelation 1:7 that "every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth (or land) shall wail because of him." Zechariah was saying that the "tribes of the land" would mourn for “Him whom they had pierced.” Who were those tribes? "The inhabitants of Jerusalem” – not the world at some future date. From these things (and more) we can see that one of the main purposes of the Revelation to the seven churches was to reveal Jesus to the nation of Israel. The place of this final revealing would be Jerusalem and it would be to those who pierced Him. This is not a general reference to the Jewish nation, who today are not one bit different in the eyes of God than every Gentile but was a reference to Christ's contemporary generation – a generation was destroyed in AD 70, by the Roman Legions.

The Woman

The next thing that we need to look at is "the woman" found in chapters 17 and 18. John wrote that he saw a "woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus" (17:6). The "woman" had this name written on her forehead: "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" (17:5). The angel said that "the woman" was a poetic symbol of "that great city" (17:18); in whom "was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (18:24). Then John wrote, "Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her… Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all." (18:20-21). So who was this "woman?" This "great city?" John gives us a clue in Revelation 11:8, where he wrote, "And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." This shows us, as we saw above, that John was referring to the Jerusalem of his day. To prove this assertion we need to look at the term "Sodom," John used to describe it. This was a "figurative" name describing her spiritual condition rather than an actual location. Letting the Bible interpret itself, we find this is a reference to Jerusalem. In Isaiah, chapter 1, after declaring that he had a "vision…concerning Judah and Jerusalem" (verse 1), Isaiah wrote, "Hear the words of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom." In Jeremiah 23:14, because of the adulterous prophets, God said that Jerusalem and her inhabitants were "all of them unto me as Sodom." But what about the reference to "Egypt?" Nowhere in the Bible is Jerusalem called Egypt. However, the first century generation of Jews were also in an exodus. While Old Testament Israel's exodus was from the bondage of Egypt, the New Testament Israel's exodus was from the bondage of the Old Covenant Law – housed at Jerusalem. In this I think we have a fairly clear reference to Jerusalem, that Sodom, that Egypt being referred to in Revelation.

The Sixth King

So far we have seen that Revelation deals with the revealing of Jesus to first century Israel. As we’ve seen, "the woman" John saw was first century Jerusalem. Revelation 17:10 says: “And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.” The "kings" spoken of therefore, were the rulers of the known world of John's day, (the Roman Empire) since the Jews had “no king but Caesar.” These "kings" were not

The Roman Emperors and the Dating of Revelation

Ruling at the same time, for as the text says "five fell," meaning that five of those kings had come and gone. Then "one is," referring to the "king" who was ruling at the time Revelation was written. This is where we have one of the clearest proofs for dating this book. If we simply examine the list of Roman Emperors, we will be able to determine who the sixth king was, and the time Revelation was written. There are the Roman Emperors: Julius Caesar; Augustus; Tiberius; Gaius (Caligula); Claudius; and the sixth emperor, the one who NOW IS was… that’s right, Nero. And when did Nero reign? From 54AD to June of 68AD. AGAIN, Revelation 17:10 says: “And there are seven kings: five are fallen (we named them), and one is (Nero), and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.” That would be a man named Galba who would reign only six months after the horrid Nero. The man who did terrible things to Christians, who had Peter and Paul put to death, and whom God used to destroy the Jews in Jerusalem. It was Nero who was in power and gave the command to Vespasian to destroy Jerusalem. Historically, Nero is the one that persecuted Christians beyond all comparison. John's banishment to Patmos was itself a result of the great persecution of Nero. This was the sixth king mentioned in Revelation, proving beyond any doubt that Revelation was written before the Roman/Jewish war.

The Song of Moses

To anyone familiar with the Law of Moses and Jewish tradition, Revelation 15:2,3 will have meaning. It says that those martyrs "who had come off victorious from the Beast" were singing "the Song of Moses." The first thing we have to ask ourselves is if these martyrs spoken of here are going to be Christian’s living today why are they singing the song of Moses? How does it go? Is it to the tune of we will rock you? Where are the words found? Well, in case I’m wrong, the Song of Moses is found in Deuteronomy 32:1-43. The Jews were to sing this song to remind themselves of what would befall them "in the latter days" (Deuteronomy 31:29). The song specifically talks about "their end" – the Jews (verse 20), and details their destruction by a consuming "fire" (verse 22), "famine" (verse 24), "plague" (verse 24) and "bitter destruction" (verse 24). In it God calls them a "perverse generation" (verses 5 and 20), and says He will "render vengeance" upon them and "vindicate His people" (verse 41 and 36 respectively). Why would Christian martyrs of the 21st century be singing this song? They wouldn’t.

The Element and References to Time

As we pointed out this is a Revelation of Jesus Christ who tells John that the fulfillment of the prophecies of this book was soon. Right off the bat in Revelation 1:1 and 3, John informed his readers, the seven churches of Asia (verse 4), that the contents of this volume "must shortly come to pass." The CONTENTS of this book. Again – take note! John did not write that some of the events, or even most of the events must “shortly” take place. He wrote that all of the events contained in Revelation "must shortly come to pass." Why? Why must those things "shortly come to pass?" Because "the time (was) at hand." At hand for whom? The seven churches of Asia, specifically, and to the church of the first century in general. The time for what was at hand? "The Revelation of Jesus Christ." Then, as mentioned last week, in Revelation 22:6, John wrote that the Lord sent an angel to John "to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done." Here, at the end of the book of Revelation, John recorded the exact same message that he did in chapter 1. Have you ever noticed this? This again emphasizes that all of the events contained in Revelation were about to take place in the first century — not stretched throughout time, and certainly not for any future generation. In Revelation 22:10, the angel of the Lord said to John, "Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand." Once more, we have proof that the events of Revelation were about to take place in the first century. However, another element was added to this warning

Understanding the Sealed Book in Scripture

told John not to seal the Scroll. Why is this important? To get our answer we have to let scripture explain so let's look at the book of Daniel. After Daniel had received visions concerning his people (the nation of Israel), he was told, "thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book" (12:1). Daniel is then told how they would be rescued — by resurrection, some would be rewarded with "everlasting life" and others with "everlasting contempt" (verse 2). But then, Daniel is told something very peculiar. In verse 4, Daniel was told, "shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end." We have to refuse the temptation to believe that when Daniel says “the time of the end," it is not the same thing as "the end of time". There is a huge difference between the end of time and the time of the end. So the time of the end of what and for whom? Verse 1 told us that Daniel's visions were concerned the nation of Israel, not mankind in general. Next, Daniel saw two angels talking about the fulfillment of all that he had seen (verse 6). One asked the other, "How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" The answer was, "when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished." (verse 7). But Daniel could not understand what they meant, so he asked again, "When?" This is what the angel said in reply: "Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end."

The Revelation Perspective

Did you know that there is only one other place in the Bible where “a sealed book” is referred to? Revelation, chapter 5 which says: Revelation 5:1 And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. The reason this has direct bearing on Revelation 21-22 is that Daniel was told to “seal his book” concerning the end "for it pertains to many days in the future" (Daniel 8:26), but John was told not to seal his book "because the time is at hand" (Revelation 22:10). The end of Old Covenant Israel was at hand. The end of that world or age. All things written had to be fulfilled by the time Jerusalem – that age, that world, fell. Then, speaking of timing Revelation 21:12 Jesus says to John: "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." Notice that Jesus did not say that "when I come, I will come quickly," He emphatically said that He was coming "quickly." But He also said something else. He said “that His reward was with Him to give every man according to his works.”

Scriptural Interpretation

Now some state that this has not happened yet. However, we AGAIN must let Scripture interpret Scripture and so we turn to Matthew 16:27-28, Mark 8:38-9:1 and Luke 9:26-27. Did you know that Jesus said the exact same thing in these three verses that He did in Revelation 21. Again, in Revelation 21, He said He was coming and "he shall reward every man according to his works." But, Jesus also said in these three verses, "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Notice that Jesus tied His coming to the lives of His disciples. And that He said that some of his listeners would not die until He came. To whom was He coming – those alive within that generation. And what will be their reward? Daniel told us that the "rewards" would be that some would be resurrected to "everlasting life" and others to "everlasting contempt".

POINT #9 No mention of the Destruction of Jerusalem to the Seven Churches

We mentioned this last week but to believe that Revelation was written after the destruction of Jerusalem – an even spoken anciently all the way back to Deuteronomy – one so devastating to the House of Israel but Jesus never refers to it in this book is not imperical evidence but its really, really odd.

POINT #10 Conclusion

If a person doesn't believe the first three verses of Revelation (i.e., the near expectation of the events), neither will he believe the rest of the book. For if a person is unwilling to accept the time constraints of

Understanding the Timing of the New Testament Writings

The text, the rest of the document can mean anything that the reader desires. If the Apostle John was banished to Patmos under the reign of Nero, as the internal evidence indicates, he wrote the book of Revelation about AD 68 or 69, which was after the death of that emperor. If all the books of the New Testament were written after 70 AD why do they speak as if Jerusalem is still standing – temple and vibrant community intact? It is of interest that in the Syrian version of the Book of Revelation, first published in 1627 (and, afterwards in the London Polyglot) we find the following inscription: "The Revelation which God made to John the evangelist, in the Island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero Caesar." This places John’s hand to paper well before 69AD. Drop the tradition. We claim to love the Bible and to use it and rely on it Sola Scriptura how about we start letting it speak for itself by the spirit instead of by the traditions and fears and myths of Man?

Subjective vs. Objective Christianity

Shawn, while I have in the past been in agreement with your points, the following is puzzling to me, in particular the use of "Subjective", and the placing of the Spirit over the Word of God. Forgive me, but this appears inconsistent with what I have experienced from you over time, which is an insistence that our beliefs be biblically based. Moreover, the use of subjective seems to immediately make everything open to someone's interpretation and therefore dangerously open to deception and false teaching. From what I know of you, I don't imagine this is your point, so help me get where you are coming from.

Components of Subjective Christianity

Simultaneously, we also endorse what we refer to as Subjective Christianity rather than Objective, Brick and Mortar Christianity. In summary, all this means is that in Christianity – The Spirit is primary and preferential. The Word is secondary and referential. Tradition is at best deferential, and Man and Mortar are inconsequential. Thanks, Carole Makowski

Personal Journeys and Questions on Faith

From: Seth Tanner

Subject: Questions for Shawn. Seeking.

Message Body: Dear Shawn, I am an inactive Mormon (served a mission, married in the temple but separated now, etc. etc.) struggling to find Christ. A real, true heartfelt relationship with Jesus Christ. I don’t believe I have ever truly had a personal experience where I have felt saved; like you describe in your book entitled, Born again Mormon. Great book by the way. I have felt the presence of the Spirit very strong before, but not sure if it is just emotions or not. I remember not too long ago that you visited a number of Christian churches and were not impressed with what you experienced. I am willing to visit every single congregation in order to find what I am looking for. I know this is personal to each person, but I would love to know your feelings regarding this and what your definition of authentic Christianity is. I am open and searching. Please respond when you have time. I sincerely appreciate all you do and have done to bring souls unto Christ. Best regards, Seth T.

From: Danna S.

Subject: Joseph’ Smith’s Gospel

Message Body: I am sure that you are aware that this is not Joseph’s Smith’s gospel. The name of the Church that was restored- rightly has the name of its creator who is Jesus Christ. As Christ states in 3 Nephi 27:8 of the Book of Mormon, “And how be it my church save it be called in my name? For if a church be called in Moses; name then it be Moses; church; or if it be called in the name of a man then if be the church of a man; but if it be called in my name then it is my church, if it so be that they are built upon my gospel.” Our church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and we love you too!

From: Tiffany B.

Subject: which church to choose

Message Body: To whom it may concern, I am in the process of deciding which church to join and have been visiting different ones. I found a love between the Catholic and Mormon church but then I discovered negative views on the LDS church. They also say they are the only true church. I am new at knowing God and Jesus and would like to know if the Catholic church is closest to the church Jesus formed? Thank you

Hi Shawn, I just wanted to write to you and get some of your insights regarding some things. I wanted to start by thanking you for giving me a very different perspective and outlook on Christianity as compared to what I

Jewish Identity and Faith

I am Jewish and I was born and raised in Israel. Being Jewish is part of my very identity. It is part of everything we are. When you grow up in Israel, you really connect yourself with Judaism in every way. We have a long and sad history as a people. I come from generations of people that died for their belief in God. They died for what they believe God wanted them to do. In Israel, I see a group of dedicated people looking to do good in the world and please God in every way. I just wanted to share my thoughts about some topics that have caused me great heartache over my years spent living in America. In the states, I have made many friendships with Christians coming from many denominations. I actually found your show because I wanted to learn more about the Mormon faith since I had many Mormon friends.

Questions on Faith and Belief

The first topic is the fact that so many Christians believe I am going to hell for not believing in Christ. Honestly, I tell you this with a hundred percent sincerity, that I would follow whatever God wanted me to follow. If that path is Christ, then so be it. However, I also believe that God knows all and He knows what I would need to receive in order to convince me that this is His path. Maybe some people need more proof than others and maybe I am just one of those. That might be a fault of mine. My question is if God knows that I am trying to live a good life living according to the word of God as I see it, why would He withhold an experience from me in order to fine tune my path? Why would He withhold from my people? Why would He allow so many of us to die because we are Jewish just so we can get damned to hell because we didn't follow the right path? I understand that many Christians believe we are just being stubborn and I definitely agree that some of us are. However, I would venture to say that Israelis are some of the most open-minded people. I don't think they would actively deny something if God showed them that way.

Understanding Religious Texts

Secondly, even Christians believe that the Torah and the Tanach were given as inspiration. Why do you think Christians think that I am not doing things right even though I am following God's word? I understand that some might think that I do not have the whole picture and I understand that perspective but at one point, this was God's standard and even Christians would agree to that. I don't believe He is a changing being and if He gave this part to my people at one point in time, why should it not suffice now?

Human Nature and Original Sin

Thirdly, I find it tough to swallow the notion that people are inherently evil in their nature. I understand that we are not always the best beings and there are many things about us that would merit this perspective. However, I do not understand how God can hold me responsible for something that my great, great, great, great, great grandfather Adam did. I had no control over his choice to eat the apple and fall. I had no say in it. In a sense, it's like God is setting me up for failure because I am born with this stain of original sin and then He is not giving me what I need in order to understand the path to remove that. If I need Christ, God is not showing me that.

Fourth, I don’t know how I can consider these people my friends if they are comfortable with the notion of me suffering forever. Honestly, if I die and get up there and meet God and I learn that He has damned someone, anyone, to hell for all eternity, I will respectfully decline to worship such a being. During the second intifada, we had a string of suicide bombings in Israel and even in the height of my anger, I still felt compassion for Palestinians. I felt sadness that someone would go do something like this. I never, not for one moment, thought to myself, I hope this person suffers forever for what he did. Even in my enemies on the other side of the border, I still see good, Godly qualities in them as I do in my own people. If I can feel this compassion for someone, shouldn't God, who is infinitely more compassionate, take a softer stance towards humanity.

Exploring Faith and Openness

is why I am writing to you. I feel like you care about people more than the average "fire and brimstone" preacher. I want you to know that I can not say that you are wrong about Christ and who he was. I dont know. Period. Maybe, one day, I will come to the conclusion that he is the path. I am open to anything God wants to tell me. If he wants me to believe in Christ, I will. If he wants me to believe in the Koran, I will. But as for now, I can tell you that I feel that God is with me and my people. I feel His presence when I go to the western wall, or when I put on tefillin and say the Shema.

Acknowledging God's Presence

At this same time, I also believe God is present in Christianity and in Islam and even with atheists and agnostics. I subscribe to subjectivism in that sense. I apologize for the long email but I was just hoping to get your ideas. Feel free to share my email if you so wish. Keep up the good work.

Conclusion

God Bless, David