THE WATCHMEN’S REPORT
NEWS STORIES THAT CONNECT WITH BIBLICAL PROPHECY
BY Wayne J. Edwards, October 14, 2026

ISRAEL DIVIDED:
THE MESSIAH, THE TEMPLE AND THE FUTURE
PNW STAFF, OCTOBER 13, 2026

An Israeli soldier lost his military position over a single word displayed on his uniform: Mashiach — Messiah. According to Religious Zionist lawmaker Ohad Tal, the soldier was a highly trained anti-drone specialist whose commanders ordered him to remove a patch bearing the Hebrew word for Messiah. He complied, but was nevertheless removed from his position and barred from reserve service. The account, shared by Tal at a recent political gathering in Jerusalem, has become a symbol of a much larger struggle unfolding inside Israel.

How can a nation established as the Jewish homeland find itself divided over expressions of Jewish faith? And what does it mean to be a Jewish state when its citizens disagree so profoundly about God, the Messiah, biblical territory, and even the future of Jerusalem? As Israelis prepare for national elections on October 27, these questions are moving from religious debates into the political arena.

For Christians watching Israel through the lens of biblical prophecy,
the divisions reveal something remarkable:
the Jewish people have returned to their ancient homeland,
but they remain deeply divided over what that restoration actually means.

One Nation, Radically Different Visions

From the outside, Israel is often portrayed as a united Jewish nation confronting hostile enemies. The reality is considerably more complicated. In secular Tel Aviv, many Israelis embrace Western lifestyles, support democratic institutions, and oppose religious authorities dictating public policy. Jewish identity may be deeply important to them culturally and nationally without requiring strict religious observance. Elsewhere, Religious Zionist communities see the modern state as part of God’s unfolding plan for the Jewish people. For many, settling the biblical heartland of Judea and Samaria is not merely a political preference but a religious responsibility. Then there are the ultra-Orthodox, or Haredi, communities, including numerous Hasidic groups, whose lives revolve around Torah study, religious law, distinctive customs, and tightly connected communities. Some Haredi groups participate actively in Israeli politics. Others remain deeply suspicious of secular Zionism, and a small minority reject the legitimacy of a Jewish state established before the Messiah’s arrival. These divisions cannot be reduced to religious versus nonreligious. Many Israelis fall somewhere between these categories, and disagreements within religious communities can be just as intense as those between religious and secular Jews.

Even the meaning of the Messiah is contested. Some Religious Zionists regard the establishment of Israel as an important stage in national redemption. Other Orthodox Jews believe redemption must unfold through divine intervention rather than political activism. Christians, of course, hold a fundamentally different conviction: that Jesus is the promised Messiah and that His return will fulfill God’s remaining promises.

The Ultra-Orthodox Question: Who Must Defend Israel?

Perhaps nowhere are these divisions more explosive than in the Israeli military. For decades, many ultra-Orthodox men studying in religious institutions received military exemptions or deferments. Their communities have defended Torah study as an essential contribution to the spiritual survival of the Jewish people. But as Israeli soldiers have fought prolonged wars, the arrangement has become increasingly controversial. Families whose sons serve in dangerous combat units ask why other young men can remain in religious schools while their own children risk their lives. Religious Zionist Jews, many of whom serve enthusiastically in the military, frequently share that frustration. Their understanding of faith includes defending the land through military service. The dispute has reached Israel’s highest courts, which have ruled against broad exemptions lacking a legal foundation. Attempts to protect draft-eligible religious students from enforcement have generated further legal and political battles.

Military service is only part of the controversy. Ultra-Orthodox communities often maintain separate educational systems, distinctive standards of dress, religious restrictions on technology and entertainment, and traditional expectations surrounding family life. Questions surrounding employment, government funding, education, and integration into broader Israeli society have become major political issues. The result is an extraordinary contradiction: some of Israel’s most religious citizens remain among the least integrated into the institutions of the modern Jewish state.

The Third Temple: Even Religious Jews Disagree

For Christians interested in Bible prophecy, another division is especially significant. The movement to rebuild the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem is no longer merely a subject of historical speculation. Organizations such as the Temple Institute have spent years preparing vessels, priestly garments, and educational materials associated with renewed Temple worship. Some Jewish activists advocate expanded Jewish prayer rights on the Temple Mount, where the First and Second Temples once stood and where the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa Mosque now stand. Others believe rebuilding the Temple represents an essential step toward Israel’s spiritual restoration. Yet these activists do not speak for all religious Jews. Many Orthodox authorities have traditionally prohibited Jews from entering portions or all of the Temple Mount because of concerns about ritual purity and the location of the ancient Temple’s holiest areas. Some religious Jews believe the Temple must be restored through divine intervention or in the messianic age, rather than through modern political initiatives. Secular Israelis, meanwhile, may regard attempts to change the Temple Mount’s religious arrangements as dangerous provocations capable of igniting another regional conflict.

The irony is striking. Jews who pray daily for the restoration of Jerusalem and the Temple can disagree profoundly over whether anyone should attempt to rebuild it today. For Christians who interpret Daniel 9:27, Matthew 24:15, and 2 Thessalonians 2:4 as pointing toward a future Temple and renewed sacrifices, these developments deserve attention.

The preparations are real. The disagreements are real. But the existence of Temple activists does not mean Israel has reached a national consensus about rebuilding the sanctuary.

The Jews Who Believe The Messiah Has Already Come

Amid these competing visions of Israel is another community that receives far less attention: Jewish Israelis who believe that Jesus — Yeshua — is the promised Messiah. Known as Messianic Jews, they represent a tiny minority of Israel’s population. Estimates vary, with some placing their numbers around 10,000 to 30,000 and others suggesting more. Despite their small numbers, they maintain congregations throughout Israel and an active presence in Israeli society.

Many are deeply patriotic. They speak Hebrew, celebrate Jewish holidays, raise their children in Israel, and serve in the Israel Defense Forces. Some have fought and died defending their country. Their belief in Jesus has not diminished their commitment to the Jewish people or their ancestral homeland. Yet their faith places them in a unique and sometimes difficult position.

Mainstream Jewish religious authorities generally reject the idea that someone can accept Jesus as divine Messiah while remaining religiously Jewish. Messianic believers can face social rejection, discrimination, and hostility because of their convictions. Their presence introduces another fascinating dimension to Israel’s spiritual identity crisis. While some Jews await the Messiah, others debate whether the modern state is part of His coming, and still others prepare for a future Temple, these Jewish believers proclaim that the Messiah has already come — and that He will return.

For Christians, their existence is a reminder that the story of faith in Jesus began among the Jewish people themselves, and that Jewish followers of Christ remain part of Israel’s story today.

Gaza, Judea And Samaria: Who Owns The Biblical Land?

The struggle over Israel’s identity becomes even more contentious when the discussion turns to territory.

At a recent Jerusalem election gathering, political activist Moshe Feiglin argued that Israel’s military failures cannot be separated from its loss of biblical identity. In his view, Gaza belongs to the Jewish people because it forms part of the land promised by God. He advocated conquest, removal of Gaza’s Palestinian population, and renewed Jewish settlement.

His remarks drew enthusiastic applause from portions of the audience, but they also illustrated a major divide within Israeli society.

For some religious nationalists, biblical promises establish an enduring Jewish claim to the land, making territorial concessions a betrayal of Israel’s inheritance. Others, including religious Jews who accept those biblical promises, question whether they require immediate political sovereignty over every territory or justify the displacement of existing populations. Many security-focused Israelis oppose permanent resettlement of Gaza because of the enormous military, diplomatic, and humanitarian consequences. Similar disagreements surround Judea and Samaria, known internationally as the West Bank, where settlement expansion and proposals for Israeli sovereignty remain fiercely contested. These are not simply disagreements about borders. They are competing understandings of whether modern Israel should function primarily as a democratic nation-state, a refuge for the Jewish people, or an instrument for fulfilling biblical promises.

An Election That Could Redefine Israel

On October 27, Israelis are scheduled to elect a new Knesset, potentially reshaping the coalitions that determine the nation’s direction. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political future is under intense scrutiny following the failures surrounding October 7, the prolonged wars, and bitter disagreements over national leadership. But the election reaches beyond Netanyahu. Will religious parties gain greater influence over education, military exemptions, and public life? Will the next government accelerate settlement expansion or seek to restrain it? Will pressure grow to alter longstanding arrangements on the Temple Mount? And will Israel’s future be shaped primarily by religious nationalism, secular democratic priorities, or a coalition attempting to reconcile the two? Israel’s Arab citizens also have a stake in these decisions, particularly where debates over national identity, equal citizenship, and territorial policy intersect. No election can settle every religious disagreement. Nevertheless, the coalition that emerges could influence Israeli society for years.

A Nation Restored — But Spiritually Divided

For students of Bible prophecy, there is something extraordinary about this moment. After nearly two thousand years without an independent Jewish state, Israel has been reestablished. Hebrew has been revived as a national language. Jewish communities from around the world have returned to their ancestral homeland. Yet political restoration has not produced spiritual unity. Ezekiel 36–37 describes both the regathering of Israel and a profound spiritual renewal. Zechariah 12 speaks of Jerusalem becoming a burden to the nations and describes a future outpouring of repentance and mourning. These passages remind Christians that the restoration of the Jewish people and their ultimate spiritual redemption are related but distinct themes in biblical prophecy.

The modern Jewish state is home to people who eagerly await the Messiah, people who disagree over how redemption will occur, people who have little interest in religious expectations at all, and a small but faithful community of Jewish believers who proclaim that Jesus is the Messiah. Some dream of rebuilding the Temple. Others believe it must await God’s timing. Still others fear the consequences of attempting it. Some see military service as a sacred duty. Others believe Torah study is their highest obligation. And while the world focuses on Israel’s enemies beyond its borders, Israelis themselves are debating what kind of nation they want to become. It may also reveal which vision of Israel is gaining influence at a pivotal moment in its history. Israel has returned to the land. The struggle over its spiritual identity, however, is far from over.

POLITICIANS CONTINUE TO PUSH
TWO-STATES
POLLS SHOW ARABS AND ISRAELIS REJECT IT
TAMAR STEIN, OCTOBER12, 2026

The diplomats in New York, London, and Paris are still selling a Palestinian state, but the people who would have to live with one have stopped buying. A new Gallup survey released Tuesday, on the eve of the third anniversary of the October 7 massacre, found that 65% of Israelis oppose the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, with only 26% in favor. Among Arabs in Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem, the very people in whose name the state is demanded, 58% oppose it and only 32% support it.

The two-state solution, stripped of its diplomatic packaging,
means the creation of an unprecedented Palestinian state inside Israel’s borders, militarized and ethnically cleansed of Jews,
with its exclusively Muslim capital in Jerusalem, centered on Judaism’s holiest site, the Temple Mount.

It was the engine of the Oslo land-for-peace process of the 1990s, which instead of peace produced three intifadas, countless terrorist attacks, years of rocket fire from Gaza and the current war against Hamas. The numbers mark a collapse. In 2012, 61% of Israelis and 66% of Palestinians backed the two-state formula. Since then, support has fallen by 35 percentage points among Israelis and roughly 34 points among Palestinians. “Both figures remain about half of what they were when Gallup asked this question in 2012,” wrote Gallup’s Benedict Vigers. The collapse came before the war. In 2023, just before the Hamas invasion, Gallup found support at 25% among Israelis and 26% among Palestinians. Three years of fighting have barely moved those figures. Israeli support is virtually unchanged, while Palestinian support has risen modestly. The Palestinian figures exclude Gaza, where Gallup has been unable to survey since the war began. The future looks worse. In Gallup’s 2023 survey, taken just before the massacre, only one in six Palestinians aged 15 to 25 supported a state alongside Israel, half the rate of Palestinians over 46.

Gallup interviewers spoke face-to-face with 1,000 adults in Israel between May 31 and July 10 of this year, and with 1,000 Arab adults in Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem between May 13 and June 11. The Jewish communities of Judea and Samaria were left out of the Palestinian sample, and Israeli communities evacuated along the Lebanese border were left out of the Israeli one. The margin of error is about 3.5 points on each side.

A divided Israel, a united rejection

The sharpest divide in the survey runs through Israeli politics. Among Israelis who approve of the current government, 5% support a Palestinian state and 91% oppose it. Among Israelis who disapprove of the government, support rises to 43%, a 38-point gap. Even in the camp most opposed to the government, a Palestinian state falls short of half. Among Palestinians, the answer barely changes with politics. Supporters and opponents of the Palestinian leadership differed by only seven points, and the gap runs the opposite way. Palestinians who approve of their leadership back a state at 37%, while those who disapprove back it at 30%. Rejection of a state alongside Israel is strongest among the Palestinians who reject their own leaders.

The survey also measured hope for peace, and found little on either side. Just 22% of Israelis and 21% of Palestinians believe permanent peace will ever be achieved. Israeli hope peaked at 34% in 2017 and crashed to 13% in the weeks after October 7. Israelis who support two states are optimists: 73% of them believe lasting peace will come. Palestinians who support a state are the opposite. Only 36% of them believe a state would bring lasting peace, while 59% expect the conflict to continue. That last figure exposes what the diplomats refuse to hear. For most Palestinians who say they want a state, the state is a stage in the conflict and the conflict goes on. “Views on fundamental questions of peace and Palestinian statehood remain stable and pessimistic on both sides of the conflict,” Gallup concluded.

“In Israel, the idea of an independent Palestinian state is deeply politicized, splitting clearly according to views on current leadership,” Gallup added. “Among Palestinians, views are less divided along political lines.” A Pew Research Center survey published in September reached the same conclusion. Only 17% of Israelis and 21% of Palestinians in Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem told Pew that Israel and a Palestinian state could coexist peacefully, while 56% of Israelis and 68% of Palestinians said they could not. Israeli respondents pointed to the  security danger a Palestinian state would pose. Two women summed up the two sides in a single sentence each.

“This is our land alone,” a Jewish Israeli woman told Pew researchers. “Palestine cannot be divided into two states,” a Palestinian woman said.

Ten years of polls, one direction

Gallup is the latest of several pollsters to track the same slide, and every major series points the same way. The Palestinian-Israeli Pulse, a joint survey run since 2016 by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah and Tel Aviv University, measured the same collapse among Israeli Jews. The Pew Research Center has asked Israelis since 2013 whether Israel and a Palestinian state could coexist peacefully. In 2013, half said yes. By spring 2023, months before the invasion, the figure had dropped to 35%. In early 2025 it hit 21%, the lowest Pew had recorded at the time, and this September it fell again to 17%. The drop among Arab citizens of Israel was even steeper, from 74% in 2013 to 41% in 2023.

Three different pollsters, three different questions, and one result.

Israeli rejection of a Palestinian state built steadily for a decade before Hamas crossed the border, and October 7 locked it in place.

The world pushes on

None of this has slowed the push from abroad. Britain, France, Canada and Australia recognized a “State of Palestine” in September 2025. On the third anniversary of October 7, House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries used his statement on the massacre to declare, “We must commit to the creation of an independent Palestinian state.”

The Israelis have rejected partition.
The Palestinians have rejected partition.
The only people still committed to dividing the land are the ones who will never live on it.

The verdict on the ground

Gallup asked the people on the ground, and they answered. Two out of three Israelis reject a Palestinian state. Nine out of ten Israelis who back the current government reject it. A majority of Palestinians reject it too, and most of those who claim to want it admit the war would continue after it is built. The diplomats have their recognitions and their resolutions. The people of Israel have given their answer. 

Originally published at Israel 365

CHIPOTLE’S QUIJA BOARD ADVERTISEMENT
SPARKS BACKLASH
BUT THE REAL DANGER GOES MUCH DEEPER
PNW STAFF, OCTOBER 13, 2026

A fast-food chain wants to bring back its margaritas. So naturally, it turns to a Ouija board and tells customers that the spirits have spoken. That is the premise behind Chipotle’s Halloween marketing campaign, which has drawn criticism from Christians who see something far more troubling than a questionable advertising gimmick. The restaurant chain’s limited-time “Summon the Spirits Tour” celebrates the return of its discontinued margarita, complete with promotional imagery featuring a Ouija board and social media messaging about summoning spirits.

To corporate marketers, it’s clever wordplay. To many consumers, it’s another seasonal joke. But to Christians who take Scripture seriously, it raises a much bigger question:

When did attempting to communicate with spirits become harmless entertainment?

The concern isn’t that Chipotle has literally summoned demons through an advertisement. It’s that the imagery of contacting spirits has become so ordinary that many people no longer recognize why Christians should object to it.

And Chipotle is hardly the whole story.

The Bible Doesn’t Treat The Occult As A Game

Ouija boards have long been associated with séances, mediums, and attempts to communicate with the dead. Today, they appear in movies, games, social media challenges, and Halloween promotions. But changing the packaging doesn’t change the biblical warning.

Deuteronomy 18:10–12 explicitly condemns divination, sorcery, consulting mediums, and seeking communication with the dead. God describes these practices as detestable because they represent a forbidden pursuit of supernatural knowledge and power.

Leviticus 19:31 warns, “Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them.”

Isaiah 8:19 asks a question that remains relevant today: “Should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?” These aren’t isolated Old Testament warnings.

In Acts 19, those who turned to Christ publicly renounced their involvement in magical practices, with many destroying books associated with their former activities.

The biblical pattern is unmistakable: God’s people are instructed to seek Him, not attempt to access the spiritual realm through mediums, divination, or occult rituals.

Opening Doors You Were Never Meant To Open

One of the most dangerous assumptions about occult practices is that participation is harmless as long as the person involved doesn’t take it seriously. It’s only a game. It’s just curiosity. Nobody really believes anything will happen.

But since when has ignorance of spiritual danger made that danger disappear? The movement of a Ouija board’s pointer can often be explained through the ideomotor effect, in which participants make unconscious muscular movements. Not every strange experience is supernatural, and Christians should avoid attributing every unexplained event to demonic activity. But the central concern isn’t whether every Ouija board produces a supernatural encounter. It’s the deliberate attempt to communicate with spirits in the first place. Scripture never suggests that occult experimentation becomes acceptable when participants are laughing, skeptical, or merely curious. First John 4:1 instructs Christians to test the spirits, while Ephesians 6:12 reminds believers that their struggle includes spiritual forces of evil.

The question isn’t whether every Ouija board actually connects someone with a spirit. The question is why anyone would willingly participate in something God has repeatedly warned His people to avoid.

When The Occult Becomes Mainstream Entertainment

The Chipotle controversy reflects a much larger cultural shift. Tarot readings are increasingly presented as tools for self-discovery. Astrology promises insight into relationships and destiny. Psychic consultations offer supposed contact with deceased loved ones. Spirit guides are promoted in some wellness circles as sources of wisdom. What previous generations of Christians recognized as occult practices are now frequently repackaged as empowerment, entertainment, or spiritual exploration. And the marketing is inviting. There is nothing particularly frightening about colorful tarot cards, a fashionable psychic influencer, or a Ouija board appearing in a humorous commercial.

That is precisely why discernment is necessary.

Christians need not believe every Halloween decoration is demonic or that watching a fictional supernatural story constitutes occult participation. There is a meaningful distinction between portraying something and deliberately practicing it. But when society treats divination, spirit communication, and supernatural guidance as recreational activities, Christians should recognize the danger. The concern is not simply that people become comfortable with occult imagery. It’s that they may eventually become comfortable with the practices themselves.

The Spiritual Battle Most People No Longer Believe Exists

Perhaps the greatest irony is that our increasingly secular culture dismisses biblical warnings about demons while embracing practices built around communicating with unseen spiritual forces. People who laugh at the suggestion that demonic deception is real may still consult tarot cards, pay psychics for guidance, or attempt to contact deceased relatives.

Second Corinthians 11:14 warns that Satan can disguise himself as an angel of light. Spiritual deception does not always announce itself as evil. Something that appears comforting, enlightening, or benevolent is not necessarily from God.

This is especially important when people seek supernatural reassurance during grief or uncertainty. The desire to hear from a deceased loved one may be understandable, but Scripture directs believers toward God for comfort and truth.

Christians are not called to live in terror of demonic forces. They are called to recognize spiritual danger, resist deception, and remain grounded in Christ. James 4:7 provides the proper response: “Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.” Scripture doesn’t encourage believers to experiment with spiritual darkness. It tells them to resist it.

A Warning Worth Taking Seriously

Ultimately, the question isn’t whether Christians should boycott Chipotle. Individual believers can make that decision according to their convictions. The bigger issue is what happens when practices explicitly condemned in Scripture become jokes, games, and marketing opportunities. Parents should be concerned about what children learn from this normalization. Churches must teach clearly about spiritual warfare and discernment rather than leaving believers to learn about the spiritual realm from entertainment and social media. Chipotle may have intended nothing more than a clever way to sell margaritas. But the broader issue deserves more serious consideration than another round of online outrage.

The occult does not become spiritually harmless simply because someone puts it on a game board, turns it into a social media trend, or uses it to sell a product. For Christians, the question has never been whether the world considers these things entertaining. The question is whether God considers them acceptable. And on the subject of seeking contact with spirits and the dead, Scripture has already spoken.

THE PAGAN ROOTS OF THE DEMOCRAT SEXUAL REVOLUTION
JEFF MAPLES, OCTOBER 14, 2026

But you’re gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You’re gonna have to serve somebody,
It may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you’re gonna have to serve somebody.
—Bob Dylan

These lyrics in Bob Dylan’s 1979 hit song ring as true today as they would have in ancient B.C. times. It’s a biblical truth—we’re created in the image of God and therefore prone to worship. However, in our fallen state, we naturally rebel against God and worship the creature rather than the creator (Romans 1:18-32). We know from Scripture that sexual immorality doesn’t begin with sex. It starts with worship—idolatry. Man suppresses the truth in unrighteousness and exchanges the glory of the immortal uncreated God for the creature. Man refuses to honor God.

And Paul, in Romans 1, tells us that God gives man over to dishonorable passions and immoral sexual desires. That means sexual immorality isn’t the primary cause of rebellion, but rather the fruit of a deeper spiritual disorder. It is the fruit of redirecting worship meant for God back to his self and his desires. The Bible speaks of people who are given over to sexual immorality as the most grievous state man can be in. It is God’s ultimate wrath being poured out during this time on Earth. It is the ultimate form of idolatry and rebellion against God and nature. It is, simply put, the worship of the pagan goddess Ishtar. Ishtar is one of the oldest known pagan gods and goddesses in the ancient Near East with writings dating as far back as 2000 B.C and was widely worshiped throughout Babylonia and Assyria. She is known as the goddess of fertility—the goddess of sex.

Modern liberals today may not bow before a carved image of Ishtar, but let’s not put that past them. They have been known to do such things. But the religious tenets are the same. Sexual desires are placed on the throne, and personal satisfaction is treated as moral absolutes. Any attempt at placing boundaries or guardrails around sexual fulfillment is treated as “evil” or “oppressive.” This religion has its own doctrines, teachings, rituals, sins, and punishments. Affirmation is considered righteous while restraint is considered oppression. And, of course, abortion is “liberation.” Pride parades are their ritual baptisms and abortion is their child sacrifice.

Today, these pagans worship the same conceptual goddess of sex. Largely prevalent through the Democratic Party in the U.S., the quest for unfettered sex without consequences is of utmost importance. Progressives, feminists, and homosexuals are largely in favor of anti-Christian, unbiblical, godless things such as abortion, gay marriage, and LGBTQ rights. These people want sex—their entire world revolves around sex. Quite literally, they worship sex.

THE LGBT IDENTITY BOOM IS REVERSING
WHAT CHANGED?
PNW STAFF, OCTOBER 13, 2026

For years, Americans were told that the dramatic rise in LGBT identification among young people represented an unstoppable cultural transformation. Each new generation would be more sexually fluid, more willing to reject traditional labels, and more likely to embrace identities that previous generations had rarely discussed.

But something unexpected is happening among America’s youngest teenagers.
The numbers are moving in the opposite direction — and the decline is dramatic.

According to an analysis of federal survey data by San Diego State University psychology professor Jean Twenge, the percentage of ninth-grade girls identifying as lesbian or bisexual fell from 30% in 2021 to just 17% in 2025. Even more striking, the percentage identifying specifically as bisexual dropped from 26% to 13% — a 50% decline in only four years. Across all ninth-graders, lesbian, gay, or bisexual identification reportedly fell from 17% in 2023 to 11% in 2025. Older teenagers showed much smaller changes, suggesting that whatever is happening may be particularly significant among the youngest members of Generation Z and those following behind them. Twenge described the decline as looking like a “free fall,” while acknowledging that its causes remain unclear. That uncertainty deserves attention. But so does a question that few people were asking when the numbers were rapidly climbing: What if part of America’s teenage sexual identity explosion was shaped by cultural influences that are now beginning to change?

When Sexual Identity Became A Cultural Obsession

It is difficult to overstate how dramatically American culture changed its messaging toward children over the past decade.

Television programs, streaming services, celebrities, social media influencers, corporate advertising, and educational institutions increasingly placed sexual identity at the center of conversations about personal authenticity. Young people were encouraged to explore their identities, question traditional assumptions, and view sexuality as an essential component of discovering who they really were. For many teenagers, particularly girls navigating the already confusing years of adolescence, the message was nearly impossible to escape.

The internet introduced an expanding vocabulary of sexual identities, while social media communities offered affirmation, belonging, and recognition around those labels. In some online environments, discovering a new identity became a major personal milestone, complete with public announcements and enthusiastic support. Adolescence is a period when peer acceptance, social expectations, and the language available to describe personal experiences can exert enormous influence. It is therefore reasonable to ask whether the extraordinary rise in bisexual identification reflected changing cultural expectations about how teenagers understood and described themselves. And if those expectations are changing again, perhaps the survey numbers are beginning to reflect it.

Is The Rainbow Culture Losing Its Influence?

Consider the timing.

The dramatic increase in LGBT identification coincided with an era in which sexual identity became one of the most celebrated and politically charged subjects in American public life. Pride celebrations expanded. Corporations adopted rainbow branding. Schools became battlegrounds over sexual identity and gender ideology. Entertainment companies increasingly made LGBT representation a central part of their programming.

At the same time, social media amplified conversations about sexuality to an unprecedented degree.

But cultural movements can experience fatigue, particularly when something once presented as countercultural becomes an established expectation. Could some younger teenagers be growing tired of the constant emphasis on labels? Are they less interested in turning every uncertainty about attraction or relationships into a declaration of identity? Has the cultural pressure surrounding these subjects begun to weaken? We do not yet know. The CDC survey cannot tell us whether the decline reflects changing attitudes, social pressures, patterns of disclosure, or some combination of factors. And today’s teenagers still remain more likely to identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual than teenagers did before the pandemic.

Nevertheless, the reversal challenges the assumption that the previous trajectory could only continue upward. For years, rising identification was frequently interpreted as evidence of permanent social change. Now that the numbers are falling among younger teenagers, those same cultural assumptions deserve closer examination.

The Deeper Problem: A Generation Searching For Identity

There is an even larger issue beneath these statistics. Modern American culture has increasingly encouraged young people to define themselves through sexuality, political beliefs, personal feelings, and social categories. The question “Who am I?” has too often been reduced to “Which label describes me?” But labels, whatever their significance to an individual, cannot answer the deepest questions of human existence. They cannot explain why a person has value, what gives life meaning, or where genuine hope can be found.

For Christians, the answer begins somewhere entirely different. Genesis 1:27 teaches that human beings are created in the image of God. Human dignity is not earned through sexual identity, popularity, social acceptance, or cultural approval. It is inherent in the fact that every person bears the image of the Creator. Romans 12:2 warns believers not to be conformed to the patterns of this world but to be transformed through the renewing of their minds. That message is especially relevant to a generation immersed in algorithms, influencers, and rapidly changing social expectations. The Christian understanding of identity does not begin with discovering which cultural category offers the greatest affirmation. It begins with understanding who God is, what He has revealed, and what it means to live according to His truth. And that message must be communicated with both conviction and compassion. Young people wrestling with questions about sexuality are not political talking points. They are individuals deserving of dignity, patience, and genuine care.

An Opportunity The Church Cannot Afford To Miss

If the newest figures represent the beginning of a broader cultural shift, Christians should resist the temptation to treat them simply as a political victory. A decline in LGBT identification does not automatically mean a rise in biblical convictions, church attendance, or Christian faith. A teenager who no longer identifies as bisexual has not necessarily embraced traditional marriage, rejected secular ideology, or discovered the Gospel. Those are entirely separate questions.

But the changing numbers may create an opportunity to challenge the assumption that identity politics represents the inevitable future of American youth. For years, the cultural message to teenagers was that discovering themselves required questioning inherited beliefs, challenging traditional boundaries, and finding a sexual identity that expressed their authentic selves.

Now, among the youngest teenagers, that narrative appears less dominant than it was just a few years ago. Perhaps this is a temporary fluctuation. Perhaps the numbers will stabilize. Or perhaps we are witnessing the early stages of a generation growing less interested in defining itself through the categories that dominated the previous decade. Whatever the explanation, the church has something far more enduring to offer than the latest cultural trend. Young people do not need another fashionable identity to tell them they matter. They need to know that they were created with purpose, that truth exists beyond personal feelings, and that their ultimate hope is found not in discovering a label but in knowing Jesus Christ. The LGBT identity boom may be reversing. Whether that becomes a genuine spiritual turning point will depend on something far more important than the next set of survey numbers: whether Christians are prepared to offer a generation searching for meaning the truth it has been missing.

METHODIST CHURCH PROMOTION SAYS
HELL IS NOT REAL
BUT WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY?
PNW STAFF, OCTOBER 14, 2026

Halloween is approaching, and across America, haunted houses are preparing to terrify visitors with images of demons, fire, death, and the horrors of hell. But at one California church, the message this Halloween season is something very different: Hell isn’t real. And apparently, believing that makes you a more faithful Christian.

Normal Heights United Methodist Church in San Diego is advertising a special October 28 event titled “Hell Is Not Real,” just three days before Halloween. Pastor Brent will explore the history of hell, why Christians have supposedly been taught the wrong understanding of it, and why rejecting the doctrine is, in the church’s words, “far more faithful to God.”

The timing is striking. While secular culture turns hell into seasonal entertainment, a church is preparing to challenge one of Christianity’s most sobering historic teachings. But there is an enormous problem with eliminating hell from Christianity: Jesus Christ Himself repeatedly warned about divine judgment. And if Jesus believed those warnings were important enough to deliver, what gives modern churches the authority to explain them away?

The Jesus Who Warned About Hell

One of the most popular arguments against hell is that a loving Jesus would never teach such a frightening doctrine. The gentle, compassionate Savior who welcomed sinners and forgave His enemies supposedly could not also warn of eternal punishment. Except that He did.

In Matthew 25:46, Jesus declares that the wicked “shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.” The same Greek word describing the duration of eternal life also describes the punishment.

In Mark 9:43-48, Jesus warns about Gehenna and unquenchable fire.

In Matthew 10:28, He warns His followers to fear the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. In Luke 16, He describes a rich man experiencing torment after death.

These warnings are not isolated passages open to convenient reinterpretation. They reflect a consistent biblical teaching found throughout both the Old and New Testaments: God is holy, sin has consequences, and a day of final judgment is coming. From Daniel’s warning of everlasting shame and contempt to the teachings of Jesus and the visions of Revelation, Scripture repeatedly affirms the reality of divine judgment and eternal consequences. While some debate the precise imagery used to describe hell, the Bible gives us no reason to dismiss its reality or soften its warnings. Jesus spoke of everlasting punishment, unquenchable fire, and a final separation between the righteous and the wicked. These are not warnings Christians have the liberty to simply explain away because they conflict with modern sensibilities.

The same Jesus who welcomed children, healed the sick, and forgave sinners also warned of the terrible consequences of rejecting God. His love and His warnings were never contradictory. Indeed, it was precisely because He loved humanity that He spoke so plainly about the judgment to come.

Five Arguments Used To Explain Away Hell

The first argument is that a loving God would never condemn anyone to hell.

But this assumes that love and justice are incompatible. Scripture presents God as both perfectly loving and perfectly holy. A God who never judges evil would not be perfectly just. We rightly demand accountability for murderers, abusers, and those who commit terrible atrocities. Why should divine justice be considered incompatible with divine goodness?

Revelation 20:12 describes the dead standing before God and being judged according to their works. The Bible does not portray judgment as a contradiction of God’s character, but as an expression of His righteousness. God’s love offers forgiveness through Christ; His holiness does not make sin inconsequential.

A second argument claims that hell was invented by medieval religious authorities to frighten people into obedience.

Certainly, medieval art, literature, and preaching shaped popular images of hell. Dante’s Inferno influenced generations, and some religious leaders undoubtedly exploited fear. But abusing a doctrine does not establish that the doctrine itself is false. Centuries before medieval Christianity, Jesus warned about Gehenna, unquenchable fire, and final judgment. Revelation describes the lake of fire, while Daniel 12:2 speaks of resurrection to everlasting life or shame and everlasting contempt. The imagery may be debated, but the biblical foundations of final judgment cannot simply be dismissed as medieval inventions.

A third argument suggests that the original biblical languages do not actually support the traditional doctrine.

It is true that Sheol, Hades, Gehenna, and the lake of fire are distinct concepts, and translating them all simply as “hell” can obscure important differences. But recognizing those distinctions is not the same as proving that final punishment does not exist. In Matthew 25:46, Jesus contrasts “everlasting punishment” with “life eternal.” The same Greek adjective, aiōnios, describes both. Some interpreters dispute what this means for the duration or nature of punishment, but the parallel presents a serious challenge to claims that Jesus taught no enduring consequences for rejecting God.

A fourth argument insists that eternal punishment would be disproportionate to sins committed during a finite lifetime.

This is one of the more serious theological objections, and Christians have long debated it. Some defend eternal conscious punishment, others believe the wicked will ultimately be destroyed, and still others advocate universal reconciliation. Yet Scripture does not measure the seriousness of sin simply by the time required to commit it. A murder may take seconds while its consequences last generations. That analogy does not, by itself, prove eternal punishment is proportionate, but it challenges the assumption that duration alone determines moral seriousness. Hebrews 9:27 declares that people are appointed to die once and afterward face judgment. Whatever one’s understanding of hell’s precise nature, the Bible repeatedly presents final accountability as a reality, not an outdated religious scare tactic.

The fifth argument may be the most revealing: modern people simply find the doctrine of hell morally unacceptable.

For many, the objection is less about ancient languages or biblical history than about the belief that a compassionate God would never permit such a fate. But Christianity has never taught that truth is determined by whether a particular generation finds it comfortable. Jesus warned that the road to destruction is broad and that the way leading to life is narrow (Matthew 7:13-14). He also called people to repentance rather than simply affirming every belief and behavior.

If Scripture is authoritative only when it agrees with contemporary values, then contemporary values—not Scripture—have become the final authority.

It Rarely Stops With Hell

The upcoming San Diego event is hardly an isolated theological departure. Normal Heights United Methodist Church openly identifies as progressive and LGBTQ-affirming, celebrates Pride Month, incorporates inclusive language into worship, and has adapted worship music to reflect its priorities. And therein lies a troubling pattern increasingly visible in progressive Christianity. Once biblical authority is set aside in one area, it becomes easier to set it aside in others. Traditional teachings on marriage and sexuality are reinterpreted, abortion is defended as a matter of personal choice, biblical morality becomes relative to modern culture, and now even the reality of hell is called into question. Not every progressive congregation holds identical positions, but the broader concern remains: when Scripture conflicts with contemporary cultural values, which one is expected to change?

The danger is not simply disagreement over individual doctrines. It is the gradual replacement of biblical authority with human preference. Once the church assumes the right to rewrite what God has revealed, there is little left that cannot eventually be explained away. The question is no longer which biblical teachings a church accepts, but whether Scripture itself is still the final authority.

If There Is No Judgment, What Are We Being Saved From?

Perhaps the greatest consequence of eliminating hell is what it does to the Christian understanding of salvation. Romans 3:23 declares that all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory. Romans 6:23 explains that the wages of sin is death. Romans 5:8 reveals God’s extraordinary love: Christ died for us while we were still sinners. The cross is not merely an inspirational example of self-sacrifice. In historic Christian teaching, it is God’s answer to the terrible reality of human sin.

Jesus did not come simply to make people feel accepted, improve their self-esteem, or assure them that their moral choices carry no eternal consequences. He came to seek and save the lost.

If humanity faces no ultimate accountability, no divine judgment, and no danger from which it must be rescued, the urgency of repentance and salvation is dramatically diminished. That does not mean everyone who questions eternal conscious torment rejects salvation. But a theology that eliminates sin’s ultimate consequences must explain why Scripture speaks so urgently about repentance, forgiveness, and rescue through Christ. John 3:16 is perhaps the most beloved verse in the Bible because it promises everlasting life to those who believe in God’s Son. Yet the following verses also speak of condemnation and judgment. The promise of salvation cannot be fully understood while ignoring the warnings surrounding it.

Compassion Does Not Mean Concealing The Truth

No Christian should take pleasure in the thought of anyone facing divine judgment. Scripture itself declares that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked but calls them to turn and live. The proper Christian response to hell is not cruelty, arrogance, or delight in condemnation. It is humility, urgency, compassion, and a desire to share the gospel. But compassion cannot mean telling people what they want to hear regardless of whether it is true. A doctor who conceals a deadly diagnosis to avoid frightening a patient is not demonstrating love. Neither is a pastor who dismisses biblical warnings merely because they make modern audiences uncomfortable.

Every Halloween, millions of Americans encounter frightening images of demons, darkness, and eternal punishment. Most understand them as entertainment, exaggerated symbols designed to produce a momentary scare. But according to Scripture, the reality of divine judgment is not entertainment. It is a warning serious enough that Jesus repeatedly addressed it, even when His words made listeners uncomfortable.
The church was never commissioned to make every teaching of Jesus comfortable. It was commissioned to proclaim the whole counsel of God, including the truths that modern culture would prefer to forget.
And perhaps that is the greatest irony of this Halloween season.
While the world dresses up as demons and pretends hell is frightening,
some churches are increasingly telling their congregations there is nothing to fear at all.

If Jesus believed judgment was important enough to warn people about, what gives today’s pastors the authority to tell their congregations they have nothing to fear?

THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE U.S.
WELCOMES
THE VERY REV. MICAH CRONIN
THE FIRST TRANSGENDER DEAN
OF A CATHEDRAL IN THE DIOCESE OF WISCONSIN

THE PRAYERBOOK BULLDOG, OCTOBER 14, 2026

The Episcopal Church of the United States of America has welcomed and affirmed their first transgender dean of a cathedral in the Diocese of Wisconsin, The Very Rev. Micah Cronin. They are also one of the youngest deans to be nominated and confirmed for this role.

For those who are not Episcopalian, a Cathedral Dean serves as the spiritual grounding block of a diocese. The Diocesan bishop, which transitions after an average of ten-years, serves as the operating head and fulfills the duty of the “see”. Cathedral Deans also serves the ceremonial role of celebrant when it comes to memorial services of very important people and holy days.

This news comes on the heels of the installation of the Very Reverend Winnie Varghese, an openly lesbian priest who served as Rector of St. Luke’s Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Atlanta, as dean of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City. Regarding Varghese’s installation, a prominent Womanist Theologian in the Episcopal Church, Rev. Kelly Brown Douglas said, “she (Varghese) is the future of our church”.1

The Episcopal Diocese of New York, which is rich in coffers and investments but plagued with organizational problems, parish fights and innumerable parish closures, find that preaching the corrupt gospel of the world is the path to Salvation for tens of thousands of Episcopalians in the New York area compared the gospel that was preached fifty-one years ago.

So, is the gay agenda real in the church? The answer is “yes”, and evidence can be found in the celebration of the 50th anniversary of LGBTQ ordination in the Episcopal Church. The service event called “Equal: 50 years in Pursuit of a Promise” paints the gay ordination as God’s defining moment that He bestowed this upon all people, but we as the Church refused to let them be ordained because of who they are.

Small majority? Since 2003, the Episcopal Church has six active and openly gay bishops in the pool of 126 bishops; 5% as of 2026. The Church Pension Group, the Episcopal Church’s retirement, insurance and main publishing company released a report in 2021 that stated that “one out of every four new Episcopal Priests and Deacons identified as LGBTQ” compared to the 2022 poll that 7.1 percent of US adults identified as LBGTQ.

So, what is going on with the Episcopal Church and why is she self-flagellating herself for the world? The answer lies upon the failure to preach the gospel as the mission of the church. This can be found in the seminaries they sponsor and support.

Virginia Theological Seminary published their MDiv requirements shows the failure to adhere to the standards. Only two semesters of Old/New Testament “interpretation”. Which is not the same as studying scriptures in our way through instruction by the Holy Spirit. Interpretation is to study scripture as Classicists. Interpretation is also the study of what others have said about scripture. That is key here. In an attempt to the school more accommodating to their agenda, TEC has made the uneducated and unwise decision to depart from true exegetical teaching and preaching from their pulpits and seminaries to teach more on the way of “Worldly Love”.

Another example, a prominent Episcopal Seminary Sewanee: The University of the South’s School of Theology, has included a “gender neutral” policy for God the Father. This is where you will find terminology like “Godself” and “God’s people”. Changing the lyrics of the doxology to “praise God above you heavenly hosts” instead of “praise him above ye heavenly hosts”. Another egregious error that puts the ego and culture of man before Christ’s sacrifice.

So, what is going on in the Episcopal Church? What possessed them to go this route? I posit these questions for your own reflection for you to keep an eye on your and your friends’ and families’ churches.

“If God sent their son to die for our sins on the cross”. To the new believer, does this sound like the same idolatry language used in the Roman and Greek pantheons that Paul warned us about? Is this also the same language that was

used by the Romans and the Greeks in their pantheon with the perpetual drama between the gods?

Do you feel comfortable knowing that if your current pastor leaves, there is a 25% chance the next pastor would be LGBTQ?

How would you feel if they changed the order of worship to accommodate a “gender-neutral” God?

How can you look at a family member, full of disappointment and sadness on their face, when you tell them that your church hosts a drag show? (And I am not talking about a Godspell type of drag show either.)

How can you tell youth that they should not mutilate their bodies to become another gender, when the national church says that it is okay for them to do so?

Remember the Episcopal Church as an example of a tradition rich in deep history, traditions, and renowned theology; the custodians of the Protestant order of service in common prayer that has fallen to the enemy.