[GOP_1900AD]

He is too prescriptive and doctrinaire in his assessments. He is tied to a very specific timeline that supposedly started in 1948 with the creation of the current state of Israel. He is not open to other possibilities, such as:
* That this "Israel" is not the prophecied one.
* That time frames cannot be specifically predicted - that even if the real "new" Israel started in '48, that the subsequent sequence of events may take an unknown amount of time.
* That "Israel" may involve either the specific state of Israel or, the state of Israel plus world wide Jewry, and supporters of world wide Jewry.
* The role of the US - so many possibilities.
* Etc.

[mnehring]

One thing he never considers is that Revelation may have been predicting the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple in 70AD, and not as a future prophecy. If one looks at the history of the time and matches it up with Revelation, it fits far more closely than any of Hal's connections....