WorldNetDaily’s David Kupelian began a May 11 “open letter to Dennis Prager” by sucking up to him:
Dear Dennis,
Like many, I have appreciated you and your work for a very long time. I’m your age and have been a staunchly conservative, pro-Israel journalist and author for the past four-plus decades. The news organization I help lead, WorldNetDaily, has published your weekly commentaries continuously – from 2002 until your injury in late 2024 forced you to stop writing. Three generations of my family benefit from PragerU. And – I don’t know if you’ll remember this – my son Joshua was the very last questioner you answered on your “Fireside Chat” (a question about the Sabbath) before you suffered your terrible accident.
So again, I’m grateful for what you do – all of it.
Kupelian is clearly not grateful for all that Prager does, for he then took aim at Prager’s Jewish faith:
I’m also one of the many Christians who – as you so often point out with undisguised warmth and appreciation – pray for you, that you might one day come to embrace Jesus Christ as the promised messiah and savior of mankind. You’ve often remarked that you’re “probably the most prayed-for person in America” for this very reason.
And of course, since your injury, all those good people have another reason to pray for you – as I do – for your recovery. I gladly follow the hard-won progress you’ve made. In fact, your recent on-air appearances prompt me to think this might be the time to share something with you I’ve wanted to for a long time.
From there, Kupelian quickly goes into the weeds on a theological debate:
In short, as Scripture makes plain, sin and death are mankind’s inheritance from the first man.
Question: If God created Adam, whose disobedience introduced sin and death into the world, is there some reason the same Creator God could not choose to give mankind a “second Adam” with the mission of taking sin and death out of the world? This is the Apostle Paul’s premise in Romans 5, and it seems eminently rational.
Let me restate the proposition a little differently: If the first man was disobedient and the consequences of his disobedience flowed out unto the many who came after him – why then is it not rational to consider that a great, loving and compassionate God could choose to reverse Adam’s epic and supremely consequential disobedience by allowing His own Son to do the exact opposite – to be obedient, even unto death – and thereby mercifully allow the consequence of His obedience to God to flow out unto the many? It’s hard to conceive of anything more rational, cosmically simple and understandable – and demonstrative of great love for mankind on God’s part.
I know that as an adherent to Judaism, you don’t consider the New Testament scriptures to be the product of divine revelation like the Hebrew Bible. Yet I think you’ll agree that what I’m going to quote now is just universally understood to be true: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends,”said Jesus (John 15:13). A courageous young soldier who sacrifices his own life by intentionally throwing himself onto a live enemy grenade on the battlefield to save his fellow soldiers from being blown up is regarded as having demonstrated the highest form of love we can know as humans. He has literally died that others might live.
Dennis, you’ve said, “My biggest issue is, I don’t believe that anybody could die for my sins,” essentially holding that individuals are responsible for their own actions and that repentance directly to God brings forgiveness. This premise is clearly true, as far as it goes; that is, without genuine contrition and repentance, there can be no divine forgiveness.
However, if God is both merciful and just – as evidenced throughout the Hebrew scriptures – how does the scenario of the Divine Judge choosing to just drop all charges against a terribly sinful human being, who may have committed great crimes, satisfy the requirement for justice?
If, in our world, you or I committed grievous crimes but then truly repented and humbly confessed our crimes to a judge, would the judge say, “Well, you seem genuinely sorry – that’s great – so I’m dropping all the charges”? No, it would probably go more like: “I’m glad you’re repentant, that’s good for your soul, your family and your victims’ families. But I’m still compelled to sentence you to prison because you committed all those terrible crimes.”
In other words, sorrow and repentance are vital, but that doesn’t necessarily clear our record before a just God. However, what if the divine Judge’s own much-beloved and sinless Son offers to take our punishment on Himself, and the Father/Judge, in a great act of clemency, agrees to accept that sacrifice? Not only freedom, but a new and redeemed life is then possible for us, a life grounded in endless gratitude to the Son Who saved us, and a sincere desire to emulate Him.
Curiously, Kupelian didn’t bring up this argument when President Trump pardoned all participants in the Capitol riot, no matter how grievous their crimes. Kupelian continued:
Bottom line: Why would a truly great God – Yahweh, He who was, is and will be – not go all-out and demonstrate that the Creator of infinite distances and space and time was willing, in order to redeem His wayward children, to manifest the greatest possible love that human beings can ever comprehend? If voluntarily giving oneself over to an excruciating death so that others may live is the ultimate demonstration of love that we humans can experience, why on earth would the Creator of all notresort to using it to draw us back to Him?
Dennis, I submit that this ultimate expression of love – the suffering and sacrificial death of His own Son – is the most rational thing the Good Lord, the Creator of all, could do to demonstrate His great love … and to lead his wayward children back to Him.
Please consider my humble thoughts expressed here. May the Good Lord bless you and heal you in every way.
It seems like Kupelian is looking for a way to bash Prager’s Jewish faith and draw a contrast to his own right-wing Christianity.