The first view is that “all Israel”means “every single ethnic Israelite” who ever lived. This view, which can onlybe held by liberal universalists, runs contrary to the whole thesis of theepistle to the Romans that Jews and Gentiles alike are “all under sin” (Rom3:9), and so will face condemnation unless justified by Christ through personalunion.  

The second view is that “all Israel”refers to “all if not the majority of the mass of ethnic Jews living on earthat the end time after all the elect Gentiles have been converted.”Dispensationalists speak of all the Jews being converted en-mass duringthe 7-year tribulation period after the Church has been raptured. This view isbased on a dispensational distinction between Church and Israel, which canhardly be defended without reading into the Scriptures. Having said thus,however, it must be noted that a very large number of evangelical and Reformedscholars hold to this view without the dispensational embellishments of the7-year tribulation period. These include the Early Church Fathers such asJerome, Chrysostom, Ambrose, most of the English Puritans, Martin Luther, CharlesHodge, John Murray, Robert Haldane, etc. The New Geneva Study Biblestates that this view seems most likely to be correct for the followingreasons:

First, hints of it seem to appearalready in vv. 11, 12, 15, 16, 24. Second, v. 25 suggests that an end to thepartial hardening of Israel is in view. Third, “Israel” in v. 26 is notnaturally interpreted as signifying a different entity from the Israel in viewin vv. 1–24 and vv. 28–31, where national Israel (not spiritual Israel) is inview. Fourth, “mystery” in v. 25 would seem inappropriate and exaggerated ifPaul’s teaching were simply that all elect Jews will be saved. Finally, thisview accords well with the quotations in vv. 26–27 from Isa 59:20, 21; 27:9;Jer 31:33, 34, which appear to speak of a comprehensive banishment of that sinthat has been the cause of Israel’s alienation from God.

Despite the apparent strength of thearguments, my difficulty with this view is that the words beginning v. 26 andtranslated “and so” (Greek:  kaioutôs) cannot possibly be taken to mean “and then” as would be required inthis view. The word outôs does not carry any connotation of chronology.It means “thus” or “in this manner.” With this in mind, it would be illogicalif “all Israel” in verse 26 means “all the Jews alive” because verse 25 istalking about the salvation of the Gentiles! It would be like saying: “theGentiles are being brought into the kingdom while the Jews are partiallyblinded in order that every Jews alive will be saved” (which is, ofcourse, illogical). Moreover, it seems to me to be very strange that anintended demonstration of grace to the whole Jewish nation must wait until allthe Gentiles have come in, while in the meantime, the immense majority of whatwould indeed be all Israel would face damnation. Furthermore, the‘quotation’ from Isaiah 59:20–21, etc: “There shall come out of Sion theDeliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob” (Rom 11:26b) is surelyabout the first coming rather than the second coming of Christ.

The third view is that “all Israel”means “the total number of elect Jews, or the sum of Israel’s remnant.” Thisview is held with some variations by William Hendriksen, O. Palmer Robertson,Louis Berkhof, Anthony Hoekema, Herman Hoeksema, etc. This view does not sufferfrom the weaknesses of the second view. The objection raised in the fourthpoint of the quotation from The New Geneva Study Bible (above) is alsoquite adequately answered by Hendriksen who contends that “the mystery of whichPaul speaks has reference to the marvellous chain of events that result inIsrael’s salvation” (p. 382). The chain of events may be enumerated: “[a]Carnal Israel stumbles and is rejected because of its unbelief. Result: [b] Thegospel is proclaimed to the Gentiles. The elect Gentiles are saved. Result: [c]God uses this salvation of Gentiles in order to arouse the envy of the Jews.Result: [d] The Jewish remnant accepts Christ, in accordance with God’s eternalplan” (p. 377).