Is Modern Worship Helping Deceive People?

 

There are many problems in the church today, and they are evident to many of us, whether pastors in the church, or other leaders, or even just amongst the general laity. Not that we all agree about what all these issues are, but still there are many which are clear and none that are clearer than that there is a severe weakness across the western church, an aversion amongst many Christians for certain themes in the Bible like judgement and wrath, and deep flaws in how many Christians actually understand God. You could say there is a whole side of God and his truth that many Christians don't want a bar of. 

I think we could point to several reasons for this. The most common one people mention is the teaching of the pastors in the modern Church. Many people have serious issues with this, and this is certainly an issue. But I think there is a much more common reason that many Christians have a very deficient theology of God and his word, and that is because the worship is often inadvertently helping to deceive people.

Now, I know there are songs that are sung in some churches and on Christian radio that generally teach some error. But most Christian worship songs tend to be more vague than explicitly heretical. And many songs which are sung are completely fine theologically. What is causing the deception is often not what is sung, but what is not sung. Repetition has been used in the Church since the beginning to teach people both simple and complicated theology. We even see some examples of this in the Bible, like the beginning of 1 Corinthians 15, in parts of 2 Timothy 2 and elsewhere. Repetition, that is constantly repeating the truth helps it to stick in the minds of people. And modern worship achieves this, but on such a narrow range of theological issues that Christians are being catechised into a deficient theology without even realizing it. 

This is easiest to demonstrate by showing things that the Israelites sung in their worship that you would never find in a modern worship song. In this case, about how this world is controlled by corrupt politicians and how God sees that. The Bible is not afraid to bring up this issue in the context of worship, for instance, Psalm 2 explicitly teaches about the corruption of the political leaders of David’s day and God’s response to this: 

“1 Why do the nations rage
    and the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves,
    and the rulers take counsel together,
    against the Lord and against his Anointed, saying,
3 “Let us burst their bonds apart
    and cast away their cords from us.”

4 He who sits in the heavens laughs;
    the Lord holds them in derision.
5 Then he will speak to them in his wrath,
    and terrify them in his fury, saying,
6 “As for me, I have set my King
    on Zion, my holy hill.”

7 I will tell of the decree:
The Lord said to me, “You are my Son;
    today I have begotten you.
8 Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage,
    and the ends of the earth your possession.
9 You shall break them with a rod of iron
    and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.”

10 Now therefore, O kings, be wise;
    be warned, O rulers of the earth.
11 Serve the Lord with fear,
    and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son,
    lest he be angry, and you perish in the way,
    for his wrath is quickly kindled.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.”

One thing that became clear during the covid years is that most Christians had not taken to heart what the Bible says about the corruption of political leaders in this world. This is an incredibly important theme in the Bible. In fact it is one of the dominant themes of books from Judges, through to 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, all the way through to making up much of the teaching of the minor and major prophets. Yet many Christians thought there was really only one basic passage about government in the Bible, Romans 13, and that we should just inherently trust the powerful. You could not get any further away from the message of the Bible than that. The Bible’s reflections on power and the powerful in this world are far more detailed and intelligent than that, encouraging deep scepticism of the powerful and shrewd dealings with the leaders of this world. But many Christians are unaware of this.

I would argue this is the case, at least in part, because we don’t sing songs with themes like Psalm 2. When was the last time you sang a Christian song about how this world is ruled by rebellious, conspiratorial leaders, who rage against the true king? Never? Rarely? Probably never in Church. But the ancient Israelites sung about themes like this quite a bit in their worship. Just read through the Psalms and you will see many topics which you would never hear in the average church worship set.

It is not like writing songs according to these themes can’t be done. It can. Here is a wonderful example from Petra, called Angel of Light:

“City lights are flashin', they call you to the streets
Hearts are filled with passion in everyone you meet
The Boulevard is waitin', it wants to get you high
Neon signs are waitin' to sell you anythin' you want to buy

But I know your devices, it shouldn't seem so odd
You lied from the beginnin', I see through your facade

Angel of light, I see you glow in the night
But you only bring darkness to my soul
Angel of light, you're tellin' me wrong is right
But I won't let your evil take control

They follow in your footsteps, not knowin' that you fell
Bumper to bumper on the freeway to hell, you lead them into wrong
You make it look so right, you lead them into darkness
And make them think you lead them into light

But I know where you're going, too bad you're not alone
If it wasn't for the real light, I might have never known

Angel of light, I see you glow in the night
But you only bring darkness to my soul
Angel of light, you're tellin' me wrong is right
But I won't let your evil take control

You got the clergy workin' overtime to widen the narrow way
You've got politicians everywhere listenin' to what you say
You've got false apostles teachin' lies, perverting the only way
You've got principalities and powers waitin' to obey

You've got philosophies and vain deceits lyin' to deceive
You've got hate and greed, ungodly lusts in the deadly web you weave
Somehow you've got so many thinkin' you're not even there
One look is all it takes to get them blinded by your glare

Angel of light, I see you glow in the night
But you only bring darkness to my soul
Angel of light, you're tellin' me wrong is right
But I won't let your evil take control, oh no

Angel of light, I see you glow in the night
But you only bring darkness to my soul
Angel of light, you're tellin' me wrong is right
But I won't let your evil take control
I won't let your evil take control, oh no, no, oh Lord, oh no.”

This is a powerful song which directly teaches Christians how the evil one works, including how he works through the leaders of this world,

“You got the clergy workin' overtime to widen the narrow way
You've got politicians everywhere listenin' to what you say
You've got false apostles teachin' lies, perverting the only way
You've got principalities and powers waitin' to obey”

Every time I hear this song, I smile, because I know that the Petra guys understand more about how this world works than many pastors and Christians. They understand that many of the clergy are on the devil’s team. They understand that many politicians are servants of the devil. They understand that there are false apostles everywhere. They understand the devil has a legion of powers doing his bidding. Every Christian has some awareness of this. But not a lot.

Christians are incredibly deficient in understanding evil. They understand the gospel, they understand the grace of God, the mercy of God, the father hearts, and many things along these lines, because we sing about them a lot. And WE SHOULD sing about them a lot. But they don’t understand many other things the Bible talks about, because they don’t sing about it a lot. I guarantee for more Christians their worship songs give them their theology more than their pastor's sermons.

If you were to ask many Christians what their favourite 5 Bible verses were, few could tell you and few could repeat them. But many could repeat the lines of their favourite worship song, new and old. Especially if played to music.

It is for this reason that I think, often inadvertently, that Christian worship is often helping deceive Christians, because we have limited down too much how many themes from the Bible that we sing about.

I certainly was never taught a song like this in Sunday School, and nor were many other evangelicals. Perhaps we need to repent for our neglect in this areas.

 

 

How to Discern God’s Will

 

Image: Unsplash

What do we really mean when we ask, “How do we discern the Spirit’s voice in our lives?” or “What is God’s will for my life?” I think when we ask this we are usually asking one of three questions? Either, “What does God want me to do?” Or “What does God have in store for my life?” or “What is God saying to me now?” I think this is what we are really asking, and these are valid questions. Part of the problem though is that Christians can ask these questions with some wrong assumptions. I think a lot of Christian’s genuinely believe that God is going to tell each and every person what his plan for their life is, like he did for Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, Paul, and other biblical figures. Many Christians think he is going to come in a dream, or a prophecy, or a flash of a fiery chariot from the sky and hand you his commissioning papers for your life, or tell you who to marry, where to apply for a job, and what car to buy. Some people think, we need to listen for that still small voice of the Holy Spirit whispering in our heart before we make an important life decision or even some mundane decisions. The problem is that these are wrong assumptions about how God is going to answer a valid question: ‘what is God’s will for my life?’

This is a question many people ask at many points in their life, so let’s see if we can build a biblical framework for how to go about seeking God’s will. Let’s see what the Bible says.

Seeking God’s Will in the Old Testament

Let’s begin by looking at how people sought God’s will in the Old Testament. This is a good place to start because a lot of Christians don’t realize we need to distinguish between God’s work in the Old covenant, and his work in the new. So how did God speak to people in the Old Testament? 1 Samuel 28:6-7 tells us of three ways and I will add one a little later, “6 He inquired of the Lord, but the Lord did not answer him by dreams or Urim or prophets. 7 Saul then said to his attendants, “Find me a woman who is a medium, so I may go and inquire of her. “There is one in Endor,” they said.”

What is happening here is that God is refusing to speak to Saul through his usual means, so Saul goes to a witch, but the take away is this passage mentions three ways God speaks:

1. Dreams – we know what this is about, God spoke to Joseph, Jacob and Solomon through dreams. Joseph’s dreams are famous, and have made it into Broadway plays. Solomon’s are just as famous. God did come in dreams, but only rarely. In fact, there was about 12 years between when Joseph had his first dreams, and then in prison interpreted the baker and cupbearers’ dreams, and another two years for Pharaoh’s. So even Joseph is not recorded as always having these dreams. 
2. Urim and Thummin – This sounds like something out of Lord of the Rings, “You must consult the Urim Frodo”. The Urim was used with the Thummim, and a priestly vestment, and the priest would consult God, and withdraw one of the stones. This seems to be one of the most common ways God answered the question, “What shall I do?” For example in situations where David is deciding to go into battle (like in 1 Samuel 30:7-10). Before he goes to battle in 1 Samuel 30, he seeks the Lord’s answer to the questions, should he go, or should he not. It’s likely that in this situation he is actually seeking God through the Urim and Thummim.

This practice was similar to casting lots (cf. Prov. 16:33), something which the disciples did to choose the twelfth apostle (Acts 1), before they received the Holy Spirit.

3. Prophets – These guys are famous, starting with Moses we get heaps of prophets until Malachi. Most of the role of these guys was to address kings, leaders of Israel, including important priests, and other prophets, and sometimes the entire nation as one. There are a few exceptions, like where both Elisha and Elijah ministered to poor women who were foreigners to Israel. But nowhere in the Old Testament do we see prophets holding worship services and just dishing out to all of God’s people his personal plan for their lives, or answers to who they should marry, and whether or not they should go to Uni, or start their own business. We just don’t see this.

Also, these prophets could not drum up God’s word in themselves. Peter tells us no prophecy was ever produced by the will of men (2 Pet. 1:21). Some only had God come a couple of times with a message, like Amos, and Jonah, some prophesied multiple times across most of their life, like Moses and Jeremiah.

4. Theophany’s/Visions – I said I add would another way, and that is Theophany’s, or direct visitations of God. This is probably the most famous way. We see it with God visiting Isaiah and of course the famous burning bush visit with Moses, and many others. These visitations often involved angels or even the Angel of the Lord.

God came to Jeremiah (Jer. 1:5) and said these very famous words, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations” (Jer. 1:5) Here God comes to Jeremiah and tells him what his plan for his life is, God did the same for Moses, Joseph, Isaiah and others in the Old Testament. But never does the Old Testament teach us that God came to every single person to tell them what his plan for their life was.

I hear some people thinking. What about through his word. Remember they did not have personal Bibles in those times. Though what Scriptures did exist, in the temple or the palace, God certainly spoke through.

How the New Testament Believer Should Discern God’s Will

God still speaks in much the same way now, as he did in the Old Testament, in fact in some ways he has increased his supernatural work,  

“17 ‘In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. 18 Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days and they will prophesy” (Acts 2:17-18).

God has increased his supernatural work through the presence of his Holy Spirit in every believer. We should be seeing dreams, and visions, and prophecies in the New Testament church, and people certainly do. I do not deny that God can and does speak to people still today. But we need to ask ourselves this question? Does this mean that when it comes to making big decisions in life that we should always wait on God for a dream, a vision, a prophecy, or a direct visitation from God himself? Or try to discern the Spirit’s voice in our heads or hearts?

No, because God does not promise to reveal his secret will for our lives to all of us. He actually sets out a very different method for seeking his will and making decisions for our lives. He tells us in Roman’s 12:2, “2 Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.” The world tells us to follow our hearts, songs tell us to follow our hearts, love stories tell us to follow our hearts. Many parts of this world will tell us to look internally to discern God’s will for us, or what God is saying to us. But the Bible contradicts this.

We are told, “be transformed.” We don’t discern God’s will for our lives by chasing after dreams, prophecies and visions, otherwise you will never act. Nor do we seek his will by trying to sense it like some kind of Jedi Knight, the feelings of our heart are more often than not deceptive rather than helpful (Jer. 17:9). The voices we hear in our head should not be examined to see if they are our voice, a demon’s voice or the Holy Spirit’s voice. That is not how we discern the will of God, or the leading of the Spirit. No we do it by having our mind renewed and transformed. How do we do this? By reading God’s word and saturating our minds with his truth.

If you do this “you will know his will.” This means when the Bible says that we discern ‘the will of God,’ or “discern the leading of the Spirit”, we are discerning what he says in his word that we can do, and can’t do, what we should do, and what we shouldn’t do. All that is good, acceptable, and perfect for us to do is revealed in Scripture. In other words, we are discerning God’s revealed will, what he has written for us is, in his grace and mercy. In this we have a massive advantage over Old Testament saints because they didn’t all have Bible’s, and most of the prophets walking around Israel were false prophets, which is the same today, but we have God’s word to help.

We are not promised to know God’s specific will for our lives, but we are given his revealed will and this helps us to act according to the will of God. Here are examples of how the Bible says this:

1 Thessalonians 4:1-5,

“4 Finally, then, brothers, we ask and urge you in the Lord Jesus, that as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God, just as you are doing, that you do so more and more. 2 For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus. 3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; 4 that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, 5 not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God;…”

You see here how Paul is outlining the will of God for us so that we don’t have to try and work it out. This is how the Holy Spirit guides us.

1 Thessalonians 5:16-21,

“16 Rejoice always, 17 pray without ceasing, 18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. 19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not despise prophecies, 21 but test everything; hold fast what is good. 22 Abstain from every form of evil.”

Here Paul is saying clearly what God’s will for us is: rejoice, always. He does not deny God can speak through prophetic utterances, but he simply says test them. And how do you test them? Well, do they line up with God’s revealed will in his word? If not you are being deceived. If yes then perhaps God has spoken to you.

1 Peter 2:13-17,

“13 Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. 15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. 16 Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. 17 Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.”

What is God’s will here? That we do good and so silence the talk of foolish people who seek to criticize the Church and Christians.

So, if you want to hear the Holy Spirit’s voice then what do you need to do? Not look within, you simply need to pick up a Bible, read it in context and listen. This is a prominent and important teaching in the Bible. This is also actually taught in the Proverbs 3:5-8 where Solomon says,

“5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. 6 In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths. 7 Be not wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord, and turn away from evil. 8 It will be healing to your flesh and refreshment to your bones.”

Solomon is saying the same thing here as Peter and Paul.

“Trust the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding” is equal to “be not wise in your own eyes, fear the Lord, and turn away from evil.” To discern God’s will, to hear the Holy Spirit’s voice, we need to recognize that we are fallen people, with fallen thinking, and that our understanding is not perfect. So, we must lean into God, and trust him to guide us. If you do this and “…in all your ways acknowledge him…he will make straight your paths”. In all that we do we have to get to know God and we will know which way to go. How do we do this? We read his word, pray for his Spirit to fill us, and we ask for wisdom which he promises to give.

And when we do this “8 It will be healing to your flesh and refreshment to your bones.” It will be freeing. Have you ever felt the physical effects of not knowing what to do? Rather than living in fear, of not knowing what to do or what to decide, we can take what God has told us in his word and apply it to our lives and make decisions based on how we know he would have us act. And we also know that he gives us freedom, within the guidelines of his words, to make our own decisions. You don’t need to try and discern the guiding of the Spirit in some force-like way. You simply need to read God’s word, prayer regularly, seek godly counsel and make wise decisions. Whenever we read God’s word, we hear the Spirit speaking to us, “and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, (Eph. 6:17). God’s word has great power to transform us,

“11 Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience. 12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 13 And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account” (Heb. 4:11-12).

As I said above, seeking guidance from wise counsellors is important too. Don’t forget this. Proverbs 11:14, “Where there is no guidance, a people falls, but in abundance of counsellors there is safety.” 

What does this all look like? Let’s get really practical:

Seeking the Spirit’s leading on marriage? Look at what the Bible says about marriage: do not be unequally yoked, men you need to provide, etc, etc.

Seeking the Spirit’s leading on your profession? Look at what the Bible says: whatever you do, do it for the glory of God.

Seeking the Spirit’s leading on friends? Look at what the Bibles says: don’t be in the company of fools.

Seeking the Spirit’s voice on where to go to Church? Look at what the Bible says: engage in a church that teaches God’s word, where they love one another, and seek to be a light to the world.

Seeking the Spirit’s voice on how to use your money? Look at that the Bible says: be generous, give, and be a good steward. 

God wants us to use our mind, a mind that we have worked hard to fill with the knowledge of him, and he wants our hearts to desire what he would desire, and then he wants us to act. If he decides to come to you in a more specific and supernatural way then that is completely at his choosing. But considering what the people went through who God came to in the Bible, you may not want to crave that too much.

Led by the Spirit?

What the Bible says about being led by the Spirit is often misunderstood by many Christians as well. They see this and they think, “Aha, this is where I need to work out what the Spirit’s voice is saying to me.” Pastors who teach this are incredibly irresponsible and having grown up in Pentecostal churches one of the flaws I saw in that denomination[1] (all denominations are imperfect) is that a lot of mentally unwell, or mentally fragile people were incredibly attracted to that theology of seeking God’s voice because it affirmed their highly subjective way of living their lives and following God. To this day I believe that charismatic Baptists, Pentecostals, and others which teach people to “listen for the still small voice of the Spirit” are doing incredible damage, but especially to mentally ill people.

Being led by the Spirit is about having your desires prompting you to live righteously, not sinfully. Paul is clear about this. For instance in Romans 8 he says this,

“12 So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” 16 The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him” (Rom. 8:12-17).

There is nothing in here about having to try and hear the voice of the Holy Spirit. Paul simply means that the Spirit prompts us to live righteously and the flesh prompts us to sin, follow the leading of the Spirit to do what is right, not the flesh. The Spirit prompts us to cry out in praise to God, calling him father, we do not need to try and listen for its voice.

As clear as this in in Romans, Paul makes it even more clear in Galatians,

“16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other, to keep you from doing the things you want to do. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law. 19 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21 envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24 And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also keep in step with the Spirit. 26 Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another” (Gal. 5:16-26).

Again, there is nothing here about listening for the still quiet voice of God to be led by the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit’s leading is righteous living, the fruit of the flesh is sin. If you want to be led by the Spirit read God’s word, and do no override your conscience to sin. You hear the Spirit’s voice in his word and you following his leading by feeding the righteous impulses of the Spirit in your life.

So, we now have a framework of how to discern God’s will in our lives: read his word, pray, seek wise counsel and recognize that your thinking is flawed and therefore it is good to seek wise counsel from others. And whatever you do, do it for the glory of God.   

---

[1] I am not picking on them, every denomination has its issues.

The New World Order

 

“The New World Order” is an interesting phrase. Often you will hear it bandied about by the end times predictors. But the truth is we have been living in the a “new world order” for some time. If you look at a standard United States one dollar bill, at least an older one, I do not have a recent one, you will see a pyramid with the all seeing eye above it, and below these words “novus ordo seclorum” which translates to “new order of the ages” or “the new world order.”

The age of the rise and now decline of the United States has been a new world order. The age that came before it was the age of Kings and their empires. This was replaced with the Republican system of the United States which then sought to lead the way by advancing democracy around the world, or at least claim to because the reality is far different. But this ushered in an age where kings were made mere ornaments of their nations, and countries were supposed to be ruled by Presidents and Prime Ministers rather than the blooded aristocracies. The truth of the matter is far different of course, the aristocracies simply worked behind the scenes to give people apparent democracy. But still this was claimed to be, and in many ways was, a new world order. Some even called it “the end of history” where liberal democracy was going to usher in a new golden age of liberal humanity, much in the mould of the Federation in Star Trek. It turns out though that really the ancient Greek philosophers were correct, and just like the democracies and republics of the past, this was just a stage of society before oligarchy and tyranny.

Be that as it may, we have now entered into a “New World Order” of earth-shattering proportions. It has been clear for some time now that the United States is severely declining. None of its wars have been truly successful for some time, and they have become increasingly disastrous. Rather than tip the balance in favour of Ukraine, America’s support for Zelensky in the U.S.’s proxy war against Russia has instead bled the West of arms and Ukraine of men and placed Russia and its allied nations, like China and others, in the strongest position they have been in years.

But the recent attack on Israel by Iran has placed an exclamation mark on the New World Order we are now in, one where neither Israel nor the United States can operate with impunity as they have long been able. There has been much in the media about how Israel defeated Iran’s so-called “desperate” attack, but a lot of evidence points to this not being the case, but rather a significant warning to the globalist powers that Iran can now project itself, at least effectively in the Middle East. Simplicius has made this case, among others, and he is a man to listen to because while the media was parroting the lie that Ukraine was winning, he was putting out battle analysis after battle analysis showing that Russia was handling everything Ukraine was throwing at it, and in fact showing a lot of restraint in its response while winning handsomely. His Analysis of the attack on Israel by Iran is therefore an incredibly useful piece of information to help us understand what has happened and just how much our world has changed. Here are some excerpts from his excellent piece on the issue:

“An Iranian academic stated the following:

"Iran has not fired its hypersonic missiles. In fact, most of the drones and missiles that were fired were older drones and missiles. They were very inexpensive and were used as decoys. So Iran spent a couple of million dollars to force the Israelis to spend $1.3 billion in anti-missile missiles, which was itself a big achievement by the Iranians. And then a number of other missiles that the Iranians fired...cut through and struck their targets," the academic and geopolitical affairs commentator told Sputnik.”

And lastly, there are some experts who believe Iran utilized its elusive hypersonic Kheybar Shekan missile, which also features a highly maneuverable MaRV…

…This is where it gets most interesting, and why I’ve prefaced it so thoroughly.

In short: while Israel and the U.S. claim they shot down 100% of everything, and while it’s possible that the drone and cruise missile lures were mostly shot down—though we have no strong evidence one way or the other—we do have evidence that the ballistic missiles largely went unopposed, slicing through what’s claimed to be the densest air defense in the world. Not only Israel’s itself, comprised of a layered defense of David Slings, Arrow-3s, Patriots, and Iron Dome, but also the aforementioned allied airforces, as well as what’s now been reported to be a U.S. Arleigh Burke warship firing upwards of 70+ SM-3 missiles from the Mediterranean shore…

…They call this the New Equation. Anytime Israel attacks them, Iran now intends to strike them ‘head on’, i.e. directly from its soil as is their newly demonstrated capability.

Beyond this, Iran broke ground in setting new milestones for missile technology and modern warfare, as stated in the outset. Iran demonstrated the capacity to bypass the most powerful and advanced anti-missile systems in the world—ones that have no built-in excuse as is the case in Ukraine. In Ukraine, the excuse is that the Patriots and other systems are manned by under-trained Ukrainians, and are not reinforced and integrated as wholly into layered Western systems as they would be in Western hands…

… This sends a signal that Iran is now truly capable of striking any of the most high profile, high value targets of the West’s, in the entire sphere of the Middle East, within a radius of 2000-4000km. That is a significant capability that dwarfs even anything Russia or the U.S. itself is capable of in the same efficient way. Sure, Russia can send Avangards (very few, and highly expensive) and far slower long range cruise missiles, but due to the Treaty, no other country can match Iran’s cheap and immediate ballistic missile capability. The U.S. would have to send up a load of slow planes and do the traditional long range stand off attacks with slow munitions to hit targets at such distances…

… Iran is said to have thousands of such missiles, so obviously having launched only 70+ or so is likely not indicative of a major attack tasked with actually causing serious destruction to Israeli infrastructure.”[1]

The entire analysis is interesting, as it always is with Simplicius. You might wonder why we would believe what he has to say in opposition to so many media reports that Iran expended all its weapons and failed to break the iron dome? Well, for how long did the media tell us that Ukraine was winning, Russia was running out of ammo, and the war was nearly over? Many times, it might be hard to remember that now, but this was the message for some time, and while this message was being pushed in all of the major new sites, Simplicius’ analysis was countering this on virtually every point and showing us that not only was Russia not running out of ammunition and artillery shells, it is able to produce them at a far higher rate than the United States and its allies combined. This has born out on the battlefield, as have many of Simplicius’ other assertions. Of course, he is not the only one saying this. I have been following Simplicius and others on the war in Ukraine on the advice of people with far more knowledge and experience in world politics and war than I have, and much of what especially Simplicius says appears to accurately counter what much of the mainstream media says about the situation on the ground in war. And his analysis, along with others, show us that the world has changed and the West is now behind the eight ball.

Of course, we are in the fog of war, and there is information, disinformation and counter-disinformation all over the place. But if Simplicius’s analysis is correct, and there is a lot of good reason to trust that it is, then the world has drastically changed.

If the vaunted Iron Dome can be penetrated, then so too can the defences of many other countries, the defences of aircraft carriers, and military bases worldwide. This changes the balance of power in the Middle East, at least potentially unless Israel and the United States have a way to respond effectively, and it changes the ability for the United States to be able to project its power around the world, wherever such missile systems exist. This has long been predicted to be the case, but now we are seeing it in action.

Some people are not able to comprehend why this is such a big deal. Why does the fact that this attack cost about $30 million dollars and Israel’s defence cost about $1.3 billion matter? The answer should be obvious really. Because that which is cheaper and easier to make can be made in much more volume and quicker than that which is expensive and harder to make. Aircraft carriers are phenomenal feats of engineering and power, but they cost about $5-10 billion to make, and they take a lot of time and a lot of resources. And now there is the potential to see them taken out by relatively cheap and easier to build weapons by far less powerful nations. What Iran shot at Israel was barely a fraction of what it is purported to have access to. And this type of arsenal is far easier and cheap to make than what the U.S. focuses on.

This changes the world as we know it. We are now, if all of these reports are correct, in a true and genuine New World Order. One where neither the United States, nor its allies, can do what they want with impunity. One where regional powers can cause world powers to hesitate and maybe even retreat. Because what we are effectively seeing is that in the same way destroyers and battleships were surpassed by aircraft carriers in World War 2, changing the balance of world powers, so too have aircraft carriers, and ever fighters jets, now been replaced by advanced missile technology that can penetrate the best possible defences. This is a phenomenal development.

As a history lover and student of military history I think this is a fascinating thing to behold. As a westerner, and someone who lives in a country that has been prosperous in large part because the passing world order favoured it, I can only think that now more than ever we men of the West need to be calling on the Lord Jesus Christ to give wisdom to our leaders. A world where regional Middle Eastern powers can stop the U.S. military from projecting at will, is a very different world than the one we are used it. It is the difference between a Britain with Roman legions and a Britain where the legions have left. It is a world where our government leaders will need to rethink how they engage with such nations. Hopefully, this works out for long time peace. I suspect that in the short term though this will provoke more war, while both sides test each other’s current and emerging capabilities. The world is about to get a far lot more interesting because it will be far less predictable.

List of References

---

[1] Simplicius’s Garden of Knowledge, 2024, https://substack.com/home/post/p-143567052?source=queue

On Death and Hope

 

Image: Unsplash

I went to the funeral of a friend’s son recently. And it was a sad event, as all funerals are, but it was also the model of what you want from such a funeral: a mix of joy and mourning; joy that the young man was a genuine believer and that he was going to see the Lord, and mourning for the clear loss of a loved one.

Every Christian funeral requires us to work hard around these twin truths. Loss and expectation of final joy.  

Of course, this is not the sort of funeral you ever actually want to experience, the funeral of a child. No funeral is looked forward to, but the funeral of the death of someone who has lived a full life is far less painful that the death of someone young. This is the second such funeral I had ever been to and it is heartbreaking. Something no parent ever wants to see, or have to experience.

During the funeral the preacher brought out a magnificent observation from the book of Ecclesiastes 7:2-4,

“2 It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting, for this is the end of all mankind, and the living will lay it to heart. 3 Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad. 4 The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth.”

He observed that this might sound the opposite of true, but the truth is people are much more likely to contemplate their life in the house of mourning, than in the house of mirth. And that this is good for us, because we do need to contemplate these things. He is right, absolutely correct.  

A funeral like that makes you consider a lot of things. But chief among them is the desperate need to get the message of God into the hearts and minds of our children, to teach them his word regularly, and pray for them that they may have a heart of understanding of the gospel of our Lord. Every single one of our lives is a gift from God. But, it is a fleeting gift. We don’t know how much time we have left, we don’t know how much time we have with our loved ones. Our lives here are just a vapour, they are a mist that vanishes in too short a time. And some of us get far less time than others, and all of us get less time with our loved ones that we would like. And until Jesus returns “this is the end of all mankind.”

The only hope any of us have of longevity is to hope in the Lord Jesus Christ, who took the punishment for our sins that we deserve on the cross and rose again to prove that he was the Son of God and could achieve for us the resurrection and every lasting life. We need to make sure that our kids get this message regularly. As Moses says in Psalm 90:12, “12 So teach us to number our days that we may get a heart of wisdom.” And what is wisdom? To fear the Lord and obey him. We desperately need to believe this message and also to believe the urgency with which we should share it with others, especially those we love the most.

Praise God for the resurrection, it is our greatest hope, our only hope, the hope of mankind. Pray for those around you who do not believe, that they would open their eyes to the light of God and that God would open their eyes so that they could trust in him. Bless you.  

 

Violent Resistance is Counterproductive

 

Image: Unsplash

I have not been shy about sharing my criticism of Israel. And, unless your support for Israel is painted on, it is not hard to see that they have gone too far, too violently for far too long. They have turned the world against them with their actions, just as the United States did after how they responded to 9/11. This is not hard for most people to process. It is hard for some though, that is true. But there are ideologues involved in any realm of public discourse you enter into. The facts are Israel are acting deplorably and it is going to effect their support on the world stage.

But it is not just Israel’s violence that is a problem in this war. Just as Israel’s overreaction is causing problems for their highly aid dependent nation on the world stage, so to is Hamas’ violence, and especially violence against civilians, a serious problem. It is terrorism, it is morally wrong, and it also serves to bring the hammer down on the Palestinian people too often.

Putting aside, or even including, all the so-called biblical justifications for European Jews to colonize the land of Canaan in the 20^th century, what we have here is a highly advanced, numerically and militarily superior colonizing force, Israel, against a relatively primitive, under resourced and numerically inferior indigenous population.[1] This is a situation ripe for fourth generation war, which is exactly what Israel has had on its hands since at least 1948, arguably even earlier.

In fourth generation war the side which loses the moral high ground and therefore public support is painted as the most violent and is often the side that loses. This is why peaceful resistance is often far more successful than violent resistance, in the context of non-state actors facing state actors, or even vice versa. This of course does not apply in conventional war - first, second or third generation - where two armies face off against each other in the battlefield, and matching force to force is vital. Fourth generation warfare is very different.

I would argue that Hamas is a case in point for why violent resistance is often futile, foolish and counterproductive. They are of course evil, there is that. They are also harming the Palestinian  cause. Every civilian or even solider that Hamas kills just makes the plight of the Palestinian people even worse and does not help their cause internationally. Especially with those who just automatically see Israel as the moral paragons in this situation.

This is not just my opinion on resistance, this is observed by those who study the results of peaceful resistance verses violent resistance:

“Recent research suggests that nonviolent civil resistance is far more successful in creating broad-based change than violent campaigns are, a somewhat surprising finding with a story behind it.

When Erica Chenoweth started her predoctoral fellowship at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs in 2006, she believed in the strategic logic of armed resistance. She had studied terrorism, civil war, and major revolutions — Russian, French, Algerian, and American — and suspected that only violent force had achieved major social and political change. But then a workshop led her to consider proving that violent resistance was more successful than the nonviolent kind. Since the question had never been addressed systematically, she and colleague Maria J. Stephan began a research project.

For the next two years, Chenoweth and Stephan collected data on all violent and nonviolent campaigns from 1900 to 2006 that resulted in the overthrow of a government or in territorial liberation. They created a data set of 323 mass actions. Chenoweth analyzed nearly 160 variables related to success criteria, participant categories, state capacity, and more. The results turned her earlier paradigm on its head — in the aggregate, nonviolent civil resistance was far more effective in producing change.

The Weatherhead Center for International Affairs (WCFIA) sat down with Chenoweth, a new faculty associate who returned to the Harvard Kennedy School this year as professor of public policy, and asked her to explain her findings and share her goals for future research. Chenoweth is also the Susan S. and Kenneth L. Wallach Professor at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study.”[2]

The reasons this happens are really rather simple; nonviolent resistance is much more likely to increase your supporter base than violent resistance. And on top of this, it is far more likely to garner sympathy from those who have the power to make decisions. Violent resistance often begets even more violent repression and lends moral aid to those doing the repression. Hence, nonviolent resistance is a moral and practical imperative.

This was also known to the Palestinians at some point, though it has now been lost. In fact, the trajectory of the plight of the Palestinian people is clear evidence of the failure of violent resistance, because it is often morally reprehensible and practically counterproductive. Khalidi notes,  

“The PLO had renounced violence in 1988, but as large numbers of demonstrators were shot by Israeli troops and as Hamas responded with suicide attacks, the pressure on Fatah to act grew, and escalation became inevitable. Triggered by the 1994 massacre inside the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron of 29 Palestinians by an armed settler, between 1994 and 2000 Hamas and Islamic Jihad had pioneered the use of suicide bombers inside Israel as part of their campaign against the Oslo Accords, killing 171 Israelis in 27 bombings. By the end of that period, however, these attacks had been largely contained by the ferocious repression exercised by the PA security services. The PLO leadership pushed to stop these attacks at all costs to keep the limping Oslo process going. To that end, the PA security apparatus—largely made up of Fatah militants who had served time in Israeli jails—used torture on Hamas suspects just as freely as Israeli interrogators had used it on them. Such experiences engendered deep fratricidal hatred on both sides, which was to erupt in the open PLO-Hamas split starting in the mid-2000s.

In stark contrast to the first, the Second Intifada constituted a major setback for the Palestinian national movement. Its consequences for the Occupied Territories were severe and damaging. In 2002, with its heavy weapons causing widespread destruction, the Israeli army reoccupied the limited areas, mainly cities and towns, that had been evacuated as part of the Oslo Accords. That same year, Israeli troops imposed their siege on Yasser ‘Arafat’s Ramallah headquarters, where he fell mortally ill. Having avoided meeting with him after my disappointing encounter in Gaza in 1994, I was encouraged to see the ailing old man by my friend Sari Nuseibeh, and visited him twice during the siege, finding him much diminished physically and mentally. This harsh treatment of the Palestinian people’s historic leader was demeaning, as Ariel Sharon intended it to be. It also confirmed the grave error the PLO had made in moving almost all of its leadership into the Occupied Territories, where they were vulnerable to such humiliations.

Coming after the collapse of the Camp David summit, Israel’s reoccupation of the cities and towns of the West Bank and Gaza Strip shattered any remaining pretense that the Palestinians had or would acquire something approaching sovereignty or real authority over any part of their land. It exacerbated the political differences among Palestinians and underlined the absence of a viable alternative strategy, revealing the failure of both the PLO’s diplomatic course and the armed violence of Hamas and others. These events showed that Oslo had failed, that the use of guns and suicide bombings had failed, and that for all the casualties inflicted on Israeli civilians, the biggest losers in every way were the Palestinians.

Another consequence was that the terrible violence of the Second Intifada erased the positive image of Palestinians that had evolved since 1982 and through the First Intifada and the peace negotiations. With horrifying scenes of recurrent suicide bombings transmitting globally (and with this coverage eclipsing that of the much greater violence perpetrated against the Palestinians), Israelis ceased to be seen as oppressors, reverting to the more familiar role of victims of irrational, fanatical tormentors. The potent negative impact of the Second Intifada for the Palestinians and the effect of suicide bombings on Israeli opinion and politics certainly bear out the trenchant critique of the Palestinians’ employment of violence expressed by Eqbal Ahmad back in the 1980s.

Such considerations were undoubtedly far from the minds of the men (and a few women) who planned and carried out these suicide bombings. It is possible to speculate on what they sought to achieve, even while showing how flawed their aims were. Even if one accepts their own narrative which sees suicide bombings as retaliation for Israel’s indiscriminate use of live ammunition against unarmed demonstrators for the first several weeks of the Second Intifada, and its attacks on Palestinian civilians and assassinations in Gaza, that begs the question of whether these bombings were meant to achieve anything more than blind revenge. It also elides the fact that Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which launched two-thirds of the suicide bombings during the intifada, had carried out over twenty such attacks in the 1990s before Sharon’s visit to the Haram. It may be argued that these attacks were meant to deter Israel. This is risible, given the long-established doctrine of the Israeli military that irrespective of the cost, it must gain the upper hand in any confrontation, and establish its unchallenged capacity not only to deter its enemies, but to crush them. Sharon did just that during the Second Intifada, faithfully implementing this doctrine, as had Rabin before him during the First Intifada, although in that previous case at great political cost, as Rabin himself recognized.

Equally risible is the idea that such attacks on civilians were hammer blows that might lead to a dissolution of Israeli society. This theory is based on a widespread but fatally flawed analysis of Israel as a deeply divided and “artificial” polity, which ignores the manifestly successful nation-building efforts of Zionism over more than a century, as well as the cohesiveness of Israeli society in spite of its many internal divisions. But the most important factor missing in whatever calculations were being made by those who planned the bombings was the fact that the longer the attacks continued, the more unified the Israeli public became behind Sharon’s hard-line posture. In effect, suicide bombings served to unite and strengthen the adversary, while weakening and dividing the Palestinian side. By the end of the Second Intifada, according to reliable polls, most Palestinians opposed this tactic. Thus, besides raising grave legal and moral issues, and depriving the Palestinians of a positive media image, on a strategic level these attacks were massively counterproductive. Whatever blame attaches to Hamas and Islamic Jihad for the suicide bombings that produced this fiasco, the PLO leadership that eventually followed suit must also share it."[3]

Terrorism is morally reprehensible, it really is. And it is no surprise that the more any side seeks to pursue it, either through suicide bombing or other means, that they lose the moral high ground and provoke a severe response. Hamas is an evil organization that the Palestinians need to be freed from. They are causing more hurt and more pain to be brought on the Palestinian people with every act of terror and violence they commit. One can only wonder what the situation in Gaza might look like today if the Palestinian leaders had stuck to a nonviolent response to Palestinian repression, rather than resorting to the evil of terrorism. 

The only thing that manages to mitigate, in any measure, this for the ordinary Palestinians is that the Israel Defence force is just as willing to use violence as Hamas, and they are far more equipped to do it on a large scale. This is why much of the world stage is turning against the nation of Israel. That which applies to the use of unjustifiable force on the level of resistance, also applies on the national scale to state forces that use too much force against the resistance. The side which is perceived to be the most violent often loses, because all opposition to it is easy to justify.  

A nonviolent response to repression is far more successful and far easier to support morally. Hamas proves this point. As long as they are involved in the picture, I think things will get worse for the Palestinians and ongoing war will be the result. This cycle of violence will only beget more violence. Pray that God raises up true peace makers in that region. 

List of References

---

[1] Arabs originated in Canaan, as much as Israelites did even if they eventually settled further afield.

[2] https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2019/02/why-nonviolent-resistance-beats-violent-force-in-effecting-social-political-change/

[3] Khalidi, Rashid . The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: The New York Times Bestseller (pp. 214-216). Profile. Kindle Edition.

Romans 11 Means Fight For Israel?

 

Image: Unsplash

One of the most interesting phenomenon’s that I have observed when discussing the nature of who God’s people are, and the relation or lack thereof of this to the modern nation of Israel, is the common and automatic response to bring up Romans 11.

“Haven’t you read Romans 11? God is not finished with Israel.”

“Romans 11 shows that everything coalesces around Israel.”

Romans 11 shows that Israel are still God’s people.”

“The fact of Romans 11 saying all Israel will be saved shows that we should fight for Israel.” I have even heard that one, believe it or not. 

But what does Romans 11 actually say? Let’s read the relevant passages:

First Paul addresses whether Israel has been abandoned. His answer:

“1 I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel? 3 “Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life.” 4 But what is God's reply to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal.” 5 So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. 6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace.

7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, 8 as it is written,

“God gave them a spirit of stupor,
    eyes that would not see
    and ears that would not hear,
down to this very day.”

9 And David says,

“Let their table become a snare and a trap,
    a stumbling block and a retribution for them;
10 let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see,
    and bend their backs forever.”

Paul asks directly: has God abandoned his people? He answers, “By no means.” And then he goes on to explain how the Jews are God’s people and modern Israel is the continuation of the nation of David… Does he do that? No, of course not. What does he actually say? God has not abandoned those who believe in him, the remnant saved by grace, not by works.

To support this he gives the example of the 7000 God had reserved in the days of Elijah. In other words, of course God has never abandoned his people. But his people are not defined by nationality or race, they are defined by faith, as he spent the entire last chapter, chapter 10, explaining, and as he will reiterate in Romans 11.

So, Paul is not defending the physical nation or even the Jewish people being the people of God. He is pointing out that among that often rebellious nation God always had a remnant who were true Israel, “So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.”

Then he notes that the Gentiles have been grafted into Israel.

“11 So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. 12 Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!

13 Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry 14 in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. 15 For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? 16 If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches.

17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. 19 Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22 Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God's kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23 And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree.”

Paul is talking about the composition of Israel here. He begins by noting that God has always had a remnant in Israel. This means that those who did not believe were not part of this remnant, they were cut out of the tree. And who was grafted in? Us Gentiles who believe, “13 Now I am speaking to you Gentiles…17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree,…”

Paul’s argument here is that the olive tree, the natural olive tree, is Israel, and there has always been a true remnant, but all unbelievers were cut out, and all who believe in Jesus were grafted back in. How? By faith, “19 Then you will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear.” The emphasis of his argument is very clear here. Those who do not believe have been cut off, they are no longer part of the tree. Those who have faith, including the Gentiles, are grafted into the tree, made part of Israel. Paul’s whole emphasis here is to prove God has never abandoned Israel. Not meaning the unbelieving Jews who deny Jesus, but the faithful remnant, either Jew or Gentile, who believe in Jesus.

Then he points forward to a time when all Israel will be saved:

“25 Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,

“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
    he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
27 “and this will be my covenant with them
    when I take away their sins.”

28 As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. 32 For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.

33 Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!

34 “For who has known the mind of the Lord,
    or who has been his counselor?”
35 “Or who has given a gift to him
    that he might be repaid?”

36 For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen.”

So, what is meant by all Israel? Well, Paul has been arguing this entire time that not all Israel is Israel, only the remnant who believe are part of Israel, and now Gentiles are grafted into Israel. So, the obvious way to take this is all Israel means all believers through all time, including a revival amongst the Jews, will be saved, “a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. 26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,…” The Jews were hardened, so that Gentiles could be saved. Because the hardening of the Jews meant Jesus was crucified and this brough salvation to all. "All Israel" is best understood as all God's people will be saved, all "true Israel". 

Now, how you understand Israel here is debateable. I think the context makes it clear that this means all believers, because all who believe are grafted onto the olive tree, Israel. However, some see a shift back to national Israel here, and they might be correct. Certainly in verses 28-32 physical Israel appears to be the topic, and Paul is therefore implying that once enough Gentiles are saved, then there will be a revival amongst the physical people of Israel. I’m ok with this, I can see how you get this from the text. It still would only mean though that "all Israel" is the whole remnant that believes among Israel. 

However, here are some serious mistakes people make:

1)     They see this as the modern nation of Israel. This is not the case. Israel in the Bible is never synonymous with the modern nation state of Israel, which is made up of mostly Jews and a large minority of Arabs. They are not synonymous. So reading the modern state of Israel being in this passage is a mistake.

 

2)     Some say it is the churches job to preserve Israel till the final revival. But there is nothing in this text, or any text that says we must do this. In fact, the text says the opposite, it says God will preserve them for a future act of mercy. There is no reason here or justification for fighting Israel’s wars, funding their nation or any other of these things that Christian Zionists advocate. No other New Testament passage supports this, either. In fact Jesus said when you see Jerusalem surrounded flee, and early Christian Jews took this literally. They refused to participate in Judea's wars against Rome, as did the early Gentile Church, and both flourished as a result. So if anything the New Testament explicitly says avoid fighting for physical Israel. 

 

3)     People often immediately read their particular reading of this passage, based on their end times theology, into their political views in the modern world. Nothing is more divisive in the church than eschatology. It is a hotly debated topic. And how to understand “all Israel” in Romans 11:26 is hotly debated as well. The previous context points to it including all believers, the following context may point to it meaning a remnant of physical Jews, or physical Israel. Either way, this passage should have no bearing on your political understanding of modern Israel because they are completely unrelated. Modern Israel is not the “all Israel” of Romans 11:26, it cannot be, because the “all Israel” of Romans 11:26 is saved. That means they confess Jesus. And modern Israel in large measure is antichrist, not Christ professing. To read the modern state of Israel into this passage is just to misunderstand the passage at every level. 

So those who see any criticism of Israel and then immediately say, “What about Romans 11?” really need to sit down and read what Romans 11 says. It says nothing about politics. It says nothing about supplying Israel with weapons. It is a hotly debated passage, at least in regarding who “all Israel” is, and therefore, to bring this passage up in relation to criticizing the modern state of Israel can only be attributed either to biblical ignorance, or even more likely reading this passage with such a narrow lens that whenever you see the word Israel here you reflexively see the modern nation of Israel. This is a mistake.

In fact, I would say it is a dangerous mistake because this sort of reading of Romans 11 is often used by those who justify wars in the Middle East. Rather, if this passage were going to inspire Christians to any action in the Middle East it should be mission, because “until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in…” a partial hardening will remain on the Jewish people. Therefore, instead of going to war with far off Arab and Muslim nations, we should be sending missionaries, church planters, and other evangelists to get this work finished, so we can see the fullness of the gentile harvest come. The church has its strategy for reaching physical Israel completely backwards. Paul is clear, if you want to see revival amongst the physical Israelites, you need to evangelize the Gentiles. So, shouldn’t we be about this work?

It's almost as if every action of our modern globalist elites is conditioned to hamper this very goal. Something to think about.