Worldviews in Conflict: Christian Cosmology and the Recent Doctrine of Spiritual Mapping (Part 2)
Editor note: Readers are encouraged to join this conversation about strategic-level spiritual warfare, spiritual mapping, and living the Spirit-filled life. Please add your comments under the article.
Worldviews in Conflict (Part 1) with Editor Introduction
Satan in the Bible
When dealing with the related doctrines of Satan and demons, it has become almost customary to cite the warning from C.S. Lewis that two equal excesses persist.32 One is to dismiss the reality of Satan altogether, which is difficult to do if one interprets the New Testament literally. The other, I believe, is to become perilously indulgent with “devil-talk.” It seems fair to say that early twentieth century Pentecostals, in general, were preoccupied with talk of Spirit-baptism. Similarly today, some church leaders may be guilty of over-emphasizing Satan’s power to the point that the devil has grown larger than life—certainly larger than Scripture presents him.
Whether or not Satan once held a prominent position in heaven before he rebelled is a moot point. Popular interpretations of Isaiah 14:12-15 (reputed to be the account of Satan’s fall) in the U.S. were once fueled by American fundamentalist scholars such as M.F. Unger and L.S. Chafer.33 More recent scholarship reveals a much sharper division over the assumption that Isaiah had Satan in mind when he wrote 14:12-15.34 In fact, in view of the scant references to the devil or demons between Genesis and Malachi, and the complicated use of the name, “Satan,” it may be impossible to identify and organize a biblical demonology based solely on the Old Testament. As Page remarks:
Satan is a very minor figure in the Old Testament, where he is mentioned explicitly in only three passages. Even in these, he plays a secondary, not a major role. … It appears that the concept of Satan was not well developed in the Old Testament period and that it did not exercise the sort of influence on the faith of ancient Israel that it would on late Judaism and early Christianity.35
Satan’s prominence in Jewish literature more likely arose at the time of the worst persecutions of Israel’s history, under the ruthless Antiochus IV during the late second century B.C. As the Jewish people suffered unimaginable oppression and suffering,36 they searched for answers of cosmic proportions. They longed for a Messianic visitation to deliver them from hellish conditions, and they found their answers to the problem of evil in the cosmic struggle between angels and Satan.37 Thus, extra-canonical literature was reared out of a background of Hellenistic and Persian Dualism and the desperate hope of an anguished nation.
Presently we have arrived at the crux of the matter, and this time three questions must be answered to meet our purposes here: (1) what is Satan’s relationship to God and creation? (2) what power do Satan and demons have over the believing community? and (3) is spiritual mapping a biblical practice in relation to the believer’s spiritual warfare?
Satan’s Relationship to God and Creation
Concerning the first issue, there is no doubt about Satan’s position in relationship to God and creation. Basically he is a creature, not a god or another spiritual power equal to God. Since all things were created “good” in the beginning, the logical conclusion is that Satan, as well as man, fell from grace at some point. Although there are several theories and speculations that attempt to explain how it occurred, the Scriptures are decidedly mute on the specifics.41 Most likely, Satan originally belonged to the class of angelic beings42 and, later, actively rebelled against God.
Nothing in the Scripture would suggest that Satan possesses similar attributes to God. He is not omnipotent or omnipresent, though his influence may be considered pervasive and global in scope. Jesus refers to him as the “prince of this world” (John 14:30), and Paul calls him “the god of this world” (II Cor. 4:4). Here we have a “bold expression for the devil,”43 one that certainly implies the attitude of his willing subjects.44 Nevertheless, the Bible never intimates that Satan has the power of God, either to foretell future events or know the hidden thoughts of a Christian.
The main point, here, is that Satan and his demons do not pose any ultimate threat to the advancement of the Kingdom of God or to God’s perfect plan. Even in the book of Job, where Satan is introduced as the harmful agent behind Job’s disasters, God retains complete control of the situation. More precisely, “the” Satan45 became an agent of God’s purpose in the life of Job. The book of Job reasserts “God’s sovereignty over Satan, who cannot harm Job beyond God’s limits” (1:12; 2:6).46
Satan’s Power and the Believing Community
With respect to the second question, the New Testament shows that Satan can influence the decisions and behavior of a believer. Among Jesus’ disciples, two stand out as having been influenced by Satan. Peter protested Jesus’ prediction of suffering and it earned him the Master’s rebuke (Matt. 16:23; Mark 8:33). Addressing Peter he said, “Get behind me, Satan!” Although Peter’s concern for his Lord seems admirable (he did not want Jesus to suffer), he was acting as the spokesman for the devil—in other words—saying what the devil would say. Satan’s greater influence, however, was reserved for Judas (John 13:2, 27) whose greed inclined him to foolish conclusions and eventually led him to complete moral collapse (John 12:6; cf., Luke 22:1-5).
The Apostle Paul was acquainted with Satan’s strategy, having experienced it firsthand (II Cor. 12:7; I Thess. 2:18). He realized the need for believers to watch their lives carefully and resist the influence of the Enemy, Satan (e.g., I Cor. 7:5; Eph. 6:11; I Tim. 3:7). Moreover, he recognized that demonic activity can account for people’s tendency to yield to false doctrine (I Tim. 4:1; cf., II Tim. 2:24-26). Despite Paul’s negative dealings with the devil, however, he affirmed the absolute power of God over the demonic forces and the inevitability of Christian triumph and the defeat of Satan (Rom. 16:20; cf., II Thess. 3:3).
A more complicated issue involves two other verses from the Pauline corpus that mention people being handed over to Satan “so that the sinful nature may be destroyed” (I Cor. 5:5; I Tim. 1:20). Was Paul pronouncing a curse on these individuals? Was he personally handing these sinners over to Satan’s custody? The most common interpretation of these words sees them as an expression of excommunication. Although these passages remain an enigma to the church and are highly controversial among scholars, a couple of implications are worth noting.
First, Paul apparently saw the act of handing one over to Satan as a means of ultimately restoring the unrepentant sinner. Outside the protective covering of the church lies a world influenced and—to some extent—directed by the devil (II Cor. 4:4; Eph. 2:1-3; I John 5:19). Paul must have felt that exposure to darkness would force a reawakening in the wayward soul. Second, Paul apparently realized the subordinate nature of Satan’s handiwork to the ultimate plan of God. For while he acknowledged the power of darkness, he confidently assumed God’s sovereignty was infinitely greater.
In essence, Paul believed that the work of Satan might actually produce a positive change of heart in the one being disciplined. Ironically, what is understood to be essentially harmful, is used to bring about a greater good. Using Satan to promote God’s purpose should not totally surprise us in view of what has already been presented about God’s sovereignty and dominion. As Donald Bloesch insightfully remarks about God’s overarching providence:
The Bible makes unmistakably clear that behind the tribulation and discord in the world is a demonic adversary of God and man. He is a divine anti-divine being, superior to man but inferior to God. Yet behind the work of the devil is the wrath of God, for God is still ultimately in control. Indeed, God accomplishes his secret will through the perverse will of the devil. God works through the devil but not in the same way as he works through the church. Luther rightly distinguished between the alien work of God, by which he brings suffering and tribulation, and his proper work, by which he offers mercy and salvation. Sometimes it seems that God must do the former before he can do the latter.47
One issue that has plagued our Pentecostal heritage is whether Satan and the demonic world stand behind all maladies and sicknesses from which believers suffer. Certainly the New Testament reveals a number of instances where demonic activity was stated to be the source of illness, debilitation, and even insanity,48 though these accounts occur prior to the birth of the church. Given the picture as a whole, it seems that some sicknesses are caused by satanic oppression (Luke 13:16), but other illnesses may simply be the result of natural causes. This appears to be the best explanation for the case of Epaphroditus, who “almost died for the work of Christ…” (Phil. 2:30). More interesting, Paul offers no explanation for Timothy’s frequent stomach ailments (I Tim. 5:23), only that he should avoid the water and “use a little wine” (v. 23). Once again, this points out the fact that our world is real, both physically and spiritually, and that the appropriate remedy must fit the correct diagnosis.
The Apostle John characterizes some sins in the church as being the work of the devil (I John 3:8,10) and Paul specifically warns individuals that undeterred anger provides “the devil a foothold” (Eph. 4:27). Grudem makes this observation concerning the devil’s role in human sin:
When we combine all of these statements and see that Satan is thought of as the originator of lies, murder, deception, false teaching, and sin generally, then it seems reasonable to conclude that the New Testament wants us to understand that there is some degree of demonic influence in nearly all wrongdoing and sin that occurs today. Not all sin is caused by Satan or demons, nor is the major influence or cause of sin demonic activity, but demonic activity is probably a factor in almost all sin and almost all destructive activity that opposes the work of God in the world today.49
Even though the Bible clearly acknowledges the power of demonic forces and the evil influence of Satan in the world, the emphasis is surprisingly placed on human behavior and personal decision-making.50 In other words, the argument, “the devil made me do it” is unacceptable to God. Instead, the excuse represents a weakness of character and unwillingness to accept personal responsibility for one’s actions. The devil could not make Judas become a traitor unless the rebellious disciple willfully responded to temptation. God permits individuals to pursue evil desires (Rom. 1:24). The Scripture places implicit responsibility on the person who is expected to make the right choices.
The more controversial question whether a Christian can actually become demon possessed has divided believers for some time. It is not within the scope of this study to deal with the particular issue in any depth. To some extent, the problem is difficult to resolve since not everyone agrees on what it means to be “possessed,” and whether or not a person can “backslide” and thus be susceptible to demonic control. If, on the other hand, we limit our discussion to the notion of demonic “attack,” then I think it is fairly easy to say that Christians do experience such oppression (II Cor. 12:7; Eph. 6:11-18; I Pet. 5:8-10).
In a temporal sense, we are pressed to conclude that Satan does wield some power over the believing community. At the same time, it remains clear that Christ is the consummate ruler of the universe (Isa. 9:6-7; Luke 22:69; Eph. 1:20-22; I Pet. 3:22) as well as the head of the church (Col. 1:15-20). The church and the Kingdom of God are, therefore, certain to advance against every demonic strategy, and Satan’s dominion will ultimately be destroyed (Matt. 16:18; cf., Rev. 20:1-3). On the cross, Christ paid the balance of human indebtedness, and thus disarmed “the powers and authorities” of Satan (Col. 2:15). The clock is ticking, and in view of the imminent return of Christ, the devil’s time is running out.
Believers already have been given authority over Satan and demons. After the seventy disciples went out at Jesus’ instructions, they returned overjoyed that the demons submitted to the name of Jesus (Luke 10:17). Commenting on the disciples’ initial success, Christ replied:
I saw Satan fall like lightening from heaven. I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you (Luke 10:18-19).
Spiritual warfare must be seen, therefore, not so much as a practice by an elite group of intercessors, but rather by every professing Christian. We must acknowledge that we are not merely contending against government policies, corrupt politicians and the godless gurus of rock and roll, we face the unseen reality of demonic forces. Moreover, every believer experiences trials and difficulties, and—in varying degrees—attacks of Satan. Typically, this means that evil of a demonic origin stands behind and is partly the cause of some of our trials, though this does not mean that the devil—himself—is directly involved.51
Is Spiritual Mapping Biblical?
Concerning the third and final question, we must ultimately ask whether the practice of spiritual mapping is biblical. By “biblical,” I mean is the doctrine clearly taught, practiced, and promoted based on the evidence of Old and New Testament data?—either as an imperative or implied by a principle. Here, we must be careful to distinguish a scriptural basis from an experiential, philosophical, or testimonial foundation. Christian leaders, pastors and teachers, have a great responsibility and duty to perform with respect to doctrinal development. Those of us who sense the call of God to shepherd the church must take our doctrine seriously since we understand it has a profound effect upon the life of the average Christian (I Tim. 4:11-16; cf., James 3:1).
I cannot criticize mere theorizing on issues that are unclear from an examination of Scripture. Speculation, as a human enterprise, is the mother of invention, and when it is conducted in an academic setting it is both appropriate and healthy. On the other hand, books and sermons that promote doctrine can either edify or damage the church. Whether or not the teaching and practice of spiritual mapping will have any long-term negative affects on the church remains to be seen. The inherent problems of the “Shepherding Movement” of the 1970’s, for example, were temporarily masked by its impressive popularity and high profile endorsements. Eventually the weaknesses surfaced, but by that time many people were wounded, and some ministries were destroyed.52 Whatever the practical consequences, we must never allow upbeat commercialization and popular appeal to substitute for serious biblical investigation. Spiritual mapping has yet to be fully assessed on this basis. Nevertheless, I want to begin by making some constructive comments.
First, those who engage in spiritual mapping rightly point out that the church has often been weak in failing to recognize the invisible world of darkness. Since the period of the Enlightenment, a large percentage of scholars in the Western church—following the more rational European tradition—gave little attention to discussion about satanic influences. Biblical criticism, which is a legitimate sphere—in itself—was admittedly fostered in a climate of academic skepticism. During the early part of the twentieth century, continental theologians, like Rudolf Bultmann, were “demythologizing”53 the New Testament from every element they deemed foreign to the sophisticated modern mind. The notion of a real devil was thus viewed as a relic of the past, to be received only by the primitive or superstitious Christian. These cavalier dismissals of traditional church doctrine are perceived, by today’s standards, as both premature and shortsighted.54
Another noteworthy feature coming from the spiritual mapping school is their insistence that human conduct—alone—cannot account for all the evil that exists in the world. This perspective is not only supported by the testimony of Scripture, but is the conclusion of many sensible people who have taken the time to examine history. How can we fully account for the brutal, unmitigated genocide of several million people in WWII German extermination camps? Or, more recently, what could motivate one tribe in Rwanda to butcher thousands of innocent people from another tribe, including old women and children. Human nature is very dark, but darker still are the inexplicable and heinous events that bludgeon our senses, forcing us to admit that satanic influence is present in the cosmos.
Third, church leaders are right in emphasizing the need for prayer, and summoning the church to a new level of spiritual warfare. It is obvious that prayer has been a key ingredient, if not the principle means, of opening missionary doors and reaching thousands of unsaved souls throughout the history of the church. This was the case in China at the close of the nineteenth century, when missionaries and church leaders made intercessory prayer a priority. In reference to the success of the China Inland Mission, Bloesch notes:
At a conference… it was agreed that the pressing need was for no less than 100 new missionaries. As they discussed this almost impossible challenge, one of them asked, “Is anything too hard for God?” The whole company then turned to earnest, passionate intercession. As they continued in prayer, the conviction seized them that their prayers would be answered affirmatively… That very year there was a marked increase in the number of those who volunteered for service… and before the year ended, 100 new missionaries were sent out.55
At the same time, while we recognize the need for spiritual warfare and prayers of intercession, we must keep our focus on communion with God, recognizing that Christ—alone—has the power to overcome Satan. Even if we grant the idea that a cosmic battle is taking place, we still must pray in the manner prescribed by the New Testament.56 Instead of identifying regional influences, we might be better to follow the example of Jesus’ high priestly prayer in John 17. Here, the True Intercessor prays for his disciples that they may be protected (17:11-12), that they may be sanctified (v. 17), that their message would be successful (vv. 20-21), and that they would remain in unity (vv. 23-26).
Jesus’ entire earthly ministry seemed to be absorbed in comprehending and obeying the “Father’s will” (John 5:16-30), rather than identifying the particular regional spirits surrounding Galilee and Judea. He met Satan’s challenge head on, casually but forcefully (Luke 8:26-37; 9:37-43; esp. 11:14-22).57 A mere glimpse of Jesus caused demons to cringe in fear (Luke 8:28). He did not actively seek trouble but dealt with demonic forces as he encountered them during the course of his ministry.
The obedient work of Christ effectively “bound the strong man” (Matt. 12:29; Mark 3:27; Luke 11:21-22). In other words, the devil was helpless against the authority of Christ. Jesus’ strategy was simple, “…to preach good news to the poor,…to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke 4:18-19). As he approached Jerusalem for the last time, he might have sought to understand the spiritual powers that captivated it, instead he wept over the city and predicted its imminent destruction (Luke 19:41-44).
Mark characterizes the earthly ministry of Jesus by saying: “…Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God” (Mark 1:14). Clearly, Jesus saw this as his primary calling, even though he cast out every demon that appeared in his path (Mark 1:21-28). If the Master’s work focused on the proclamation of the Kingdom of God, it follows that the central job of the church remains the preaching of the gospel, as Grudem observes:
Christians just preach the gospel, and it comes with power to change lives! (Of course, demonic opposition may arise, or God himself may reveal the nature of certain demonic opposition, which Christians would then pray and battle against, according to I Cor. 12:10; II Cor. 10:3-6; Eph. 6:12).58
The church in the book of Acts was also familiar with demonic attack and the devices of evil men who attempt to intimidate God’s people and impeded the spread of the Gospel. On the release of John and Peter from prison, the church gathered together and lifted their voice in one accord. They spent no time in trying to understand the names and attributes of the evil forces surrounding them, they simply called out to the most powerful force in the cosmos: the “Sovereign Lord” (Acts 4:23-31). Some Jews, on the other hand, who apparently had no relationship with Christ, tried to engage the enemy by the use of manipulation and incantation (Acts 19:13-20). They were surprised to find themselves overpowered and publicly humiliated by a demon possessed man, demonstrating the fact that there is no inherent power in rebuking the devil.59
The Apostle Paul might well have drawn conclusions about spiritual powers behind the inordinate amount of idols that adorned Athens (Acts 17:16). Instead he chose to “reason” with the Jews and God-fearing Greeks in the synagogue, and used the idols as an illustration in his message to an assembly (17:22-34). Paul’s secret weapon appears to have been his undaunted trust in God, and his courage to pray and worship in his darkest moments (Acts 16:25-26). He understood that genuine prayer breaks the chains of darkness (v. 26) and brings about the will of God (Phil. 1:19). God alone answers prayer and God—alone—must receive the glory. It is not our fancy prayers of invocation or our sophisticated methods of spiritual warfare that bring about God’s purpose, as Barth so aptly put it:
Prayer exerts an influence upon God’s action, even upon his existence… Perhaps we doubt the sincerity of our prayer and the worth of our request. But one thing is beyond doubt: it is the answer that God gives. Our prayers are weak and poor. Nevertheless, what matters is not that our prayers be forceful, but that God listens to them. That is why we pray.60
Another constructive criticism about those leading the charge in this new field is that they have largely based their research on pragmatic tests and feelings of personal inner-guidance. Pragmatism, as a distinct American philosophy, has worked reasonably well for the medical and business community, but result-oriented theology may lead to wrong-headed and destructive paths.61 C. Peter Wagner, for example, noted for his expertise in the area of church growth,62 has based much of his findings on his worldwide travels, observations and interviews with various people.63 The main thrust of his program is largely pragmatic in nature; in other words, if it works, it must be true. Other spirit-mapping proponents argue that, unless we employ the practice, “large-scale conversions are unlikely to occur.”64 This is a remarkably odd statement in view of the early church’s success and the countless revivals throughout church history.
Moreover, uncritical inner-guidance, without the direct support of Scripture may work occasionally for private decisions, but it is a poor foundation for public doctrine. Wagner appears sensitive and open to criticism of the practice,65 but sometimes seems defensive when asked whether spiritual mapping is biblical.66 He expresses his best and simplest answer for the reason why he is involved in the practice by saying, “We happen to feel that we are being led by the Holy Spirit.”67
George Otis, Jr., considered by Wagner to be the “top leader of the field,”68 appears more irritated in his response to the question about scriptural justification for spiritual mapping. When asked in an interview on Dutch TV about it, Otis, Jr. basically responded by saying that the whole Bible supports the practice.69 Nothing concrete is offered in terms of the practice’s scriptural foundation.
Analogies and Anecdotes vs. Biblical Authority
Throughout this study I have refrained from using personal anecdotes and testimonies that contradict the findings of the spiritual mapping proponents. Although I have numerous stories to tell—and I understand the power of a story—I elected to withhold key illustrations in order to speak plainly about my concerns for biblical authority. When someone you trust tells you a story, you tend to believe him—out of respect and devotion for the person. Yet when biblical truth is involved, we are compelled to look deeper at the process of reasoning.
How should we respond to the news of several cities across the globe experiencing revival because of the success of spiritual warfare? Admittedly, we have no reason to doubt the credibility of the stories, testimonies and accounts of transformed lives and cities by the power of God.70 Nor should we question the obvious victory of the Kingdom of God in these places over the forces of darkness. Such is reportedly the case in cities such as Almolonga, Guatemala, and Cali, Colombia.71 Christians everywhere should be thankful for the large-scale conversions and give glory to God.
Nevertheless, we have sufficient biblical support to doubt that the main reason for the transformations is reducible to the careful research of demonic powers within those regions. I would argue, contrariwise, that the wonderful transformation of individuals and cities in South America, Africa, and the U.S. is due more to the providential might of God, and the profound willingness of a minority of dedicated believers to actually care for their city, rather than the study of demonic influences.
Some of the church leaders showed the extent of their dedication and sacrifice by literally laying down their lives for the harvest.72 We cannot underestimate the power of God resident in unfettered passion for the lost, nor the resilient efforts by those called to reach a city. Spiritual mapping is not necessarily the reason for success in those cities, the sovereign work of Almighty God and the obedient compassion of a few Christians may sufficiently explain the phenomena. Once again, we must not allow our individual perspective of reality to shape our biblical positions, a point—ironically—that Otis, Jr. makes himself.73
C. Peter Wagner’s attempt to justify the practice of spiritual mapping biblically by the use of analogy also falls short of the mark. He proposes that criticisms about spiritual mapping are similar to the issues raised about the historic Sunday School Movement and the abolition of slavery.74 His basic point is somewhat valid; the church has practices that are only remotely connected to Bible truth, such as our traditional wedding ceremony. However, the wedding ceremony expresses a legitimate biblical and cultural attitude toward the sanctity and regality of marriage. The Sunday School Movement was based squarely on the biblical principle to educate adults and children in the ways of God (Lev. 10:11; Deut. 6:7; Col 3:16; I Tim. 4:11; II Tim. 2:24-25). The practice of slavery, which persisted in the ancient and modern world on the basis of faulty economic grounds, human pride and ignorance, was implicitly denounced by the New Testament teaching of equality in the body of Christ (I Cor. 12:12-26; Gal. 3:28-29).
Since the practice of spiritual mapping lacks clear biblical support, where does it find its support and inspiration? The aforementioned analogies, anecdotes and inner-guidance of the adherents appear to offer the main support for the doctrine. However, when pressed on the issue of biblical support, proponents sometimes graft in extra-canonical sources or pagan worldviews to fuel their positions.75 Concerning the latter, for instance, Wagner tells a story about a demon being attached to furnishings in his home office;76 his testimony reflects a common belief associated with animism. Cindy Jacobs offers a comparative account of a Bible being placed in the cement foundation of a building site, as a means of dispelling spiritual powers connected to an Islamic group that planned to build a training facility.77 Thus the Bible was treated as a sacred charm—with inherent powers of its own—a practice known in religious studies as “fetishism.”
As a believer in the supernatural power of God, I find it awkward—even embarrassing at times—to feel the need to question some accounts of healing miracles. For example, we read of a five-year old boy who is healed of severe leg cramps. We hear the familiar story that, upon examination, his doctors can offer no natural explanation.78 His anxious but devoted mother, on the other hand, having a more invested interest in the boy’s recovery, searches frantically for a cure. A careful inventory of the boy’s bedroom reveals a dog statue that had been purchased in a foreign country. It immediately becomes suspect as a demonic residence. After angrily destroying the object, the mother is soon delighted to find her son miraculously healed. The demons have apparently been evicted along with the artifact.
The question is: is this practice, as well as others associated with the spiritual mapping movement, part of a “new work of God?” Or, are they an indication that a more primitive and dualistic worldview is being revived and propagated in the church? Wagner, himself, avoids the direct criticism that he is a practicing dualist, since he admits that Satan and his demons may only perform acts that God permits.79 Nevertheless, by attempting to identify specific demonic forces by removing statues and other artifacts, or by examining the history of a community or a region’s distinctive cultural features, his position is open to the charge that it is more characteristic of a primitive worldview than of biblical faith. It invites us into the world of divination and shamanism—and a search for spirits both past and present. Given our own country’s long and illustrious history with Native Americanism, “spiritual mappers” will no doubt be prosperous on the road ahead.
My challenge is this: must we resort to manipulation and ritualistic contrivance to outwit the devil? Is the greatest weapon of the church and the individual believer reduced to a complex methodology in which good triumphs over evil in the same way a better chess player checkmates his opponent? Once again, the picture I reject is one that suggests Satan is the current landowner, and God’s people must wrest it from him. Rather, it is an impoverished theology that maintains the sovereignty of God and the inherent power of the gospel is insufficient to crush the enemy.
According to the proponents of spiritual mapping, the war depends on church leaders and, especially intercessors, to rout the forces of evil. Based upon its early relative success, it would seem that human nature, typically restless and malcontent with God’s more patient strategy, appears ready to receive this doctrine with “itching ears” (II Tim. 4:3). One gets the impression that Christ’s simple directive to obey the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20) has been transformed into a complex set of human formulas and conference lessons that, once again, promise to be the latest answer to the church’s problem of ineffectiveness.
The net result is a powerful and popular movement, especially among Pentecostal and charismatic churches, where prophetic insights sometimes transcend biblical boundaries. Unfortunately, this is a movement whose doctrine remains, at best, dubious on scriptural grounds and, at worst, a sign of a revitalization of primitive and foreign cosmology that is symptomatic of our so-called open-minded churches80 today. Therefore, it is my conclusion that, while the interest and call to new levels of spiritual warfare is biblically-based, the fascination and practice of spiritual mapping is not.
Returning to the Basics
Finally, I conclude by appealing to the hearts of the shepherds and calling the church back to its heritage—admittedly a distinctive Western heritage—that properly balances the physical and spiritual world orders and recognizes the critical role of biblical inspiration. Do we really need to understand the nature of the powers of darkness behind the scenes in order to rebuke the demonic reality that’s portrayed right in front of our noses? Fighting pornography, disease, malnutrition, prostitution and poverty still require a balance of spiritual warfare and deliberate, organized action.
If we fail to pay attention to the fundamentals of doctrine and neglect to teach people to walk as Christians, no amount of spiritual warfare will help us. Our churches are filled with hapless teenagers, confused single adults and torn families. A woman who prophesies on Sunday morning may be unable to balance her checkbook on Monday, and have a poor credit history. A man who rebukes the devil in church one day may go home and beat his wife in a fit of rage on another day. As church leaders and pastors we are sometimes dismayed by the polarity we see demonstrated in the lives of our more “spiritual” people. Yet, if our teaching focus remains on sophisticated and esoteric training, while we neglect the basics, we should expect the sheep to stray in their walk with God. Let us, therefore, devote ourselves primarily to the “public reading of Scripture” (I Tim. 4:13) and to instructions on righteousness (II Tim. 3:16). In this way, we may see the day that all Bible-believing Christians long for: transformed lives on a large scale by the power of his Word and the work of the Holy Spirit. For surely, nothing makes a greater or more lasting impact on culture or a community than “real” Christians.
PR
Notes
32 References to Lewis’ famous comments in The Screwtape Letters (New York: Macmillan, 1943), p. 9, are fairly common in books dealing with Satan and demons. For example, see Demon Possession, ed. by John Warwick Montgomery (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1976), p. 21. More recently, see C. Peter Wagner’s book, Warfare Prayer (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1992), p. 85.
33 See M.F. Unger, “Satan,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Walter Elwell, ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1984), pp. 972-3. Also see M.F. Unger, Biblical Demonology (Wheaton, IL: Scripture Press, 1952), and L.S. Chafer, Systematic Theology, Vol. II (Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1947), esp. pp. 83-4.
34 For example, Michael Green’s, I Believe in Satan’s Downfall (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981), pp. 39-41, and Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), p. 413, agree with the fundamentalist’s interpretation. On the other side are Old Testament scholar, E.J. Young and his commentary on Isaiah (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965) and, more recently, Sydney H.T. Page’s, Powers of Evil (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), pp. 38-39.
35 Page, Powers of Evil, p. 11.
36 See, e.g., I Maccabees 1 or II Maccabees 7.
37 See, esp. James Kallas, Jesus and the Power of Satan (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968), pp. 42-59.
38 Interestingly, John’s Gospel omits the Synoptic accounts of Jesus casting out demons, the Temptation in the wilderness, and Satan’s influence on Peter.
39 Page, Powers of Evil, p. 87. See also George Eldon Ladd’s, The Gospel of the Kingdom (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959), pp. 30-39.
40 Satan’s tactics have been the same for centuries: lies, deception, murder, greed, etc. (See., e.g., Matt. 4:1-11; John 8:44; Rev. 12:9; II Cor. 4:4; Gal. 4:8).
41 See esp., Page, Powers of Evil, pp. 39-42. Page makes a strong case for rejecting a common interpretation of Ezekiel 28:12-19. He does not think it is reasonable to assume this passage refers to the fall of Satan or his position in heaven.
42 This is the most common and reasonable conclusion, for example, see Grudem, Systematic Theology, pp. 412-14.
43 C.K. Barrett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Harper’s New Testament Commentaries (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), p. 130.
44 Ibid., pp. 130-131. See also Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, Paul’s Second Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), pp. 126-130.
45 In the Hebrew text, the definite article is used, rendering it literally “the Accuser” instead of simply calling him “Satan.” See, e.g., Elmer B. Smick, “Job” in Vol. 4, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988), p. 880.
46 William S. Lasor, David Allan Hubbard and Frederic Wm. Bush, Old Testament Survey (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), p. 565.
47 Donald G. Bloesch, The Struggle of Prayer (Colorado Springs: Helmers & Howard, 1988), p. 33.
48 Jesus performed several exorcisms in the Synoptics that were related to severe illnesses. Mark 1:23-28 records a man demonized who sat in the synagogue at Capernaum. A boy troubled with epileptic seizures is relieved after Jesus exorcises a demon recorded in three Gospels (Matt. 17:14-21; Mark 9:14-29; Luke 9:37-43). One of the most amazing accounts of Jesus’ exorcisms is the story of the Gerasene demoniac (Matt. 8:28-34; Mark 5:1-20; Luke 8:26-39).
49 Grudem, Systematic Theology, p. 422.
50 For example, see Gal. 5:16-26; Eph. 4:1-6:9; Phil. 2:5-13; Col. 3:1-4:6. Note the emphasis upon the reader to take action and make deliberate decisions. Interestingly, even Judas is blamed for his decisions, despite the fact that the Scripture says Satan “entered into him” (John 13:27b.).
51 Note Oscar Cullman’s, Christ and Time (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1964), Trans. Floyd Filson, pp. 191-210.
52 For a fair description of the movement, see Harold D. Hunter’s article, “The Shepherding Movement,” in Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, eds. Stanley M. Burgess and Gary B. McGee (Grand Rapids: Regency Reference Library, 1988), pp. 783-785.
53 See especially Rudolf Bultmann’s, Jesus Christ and Mythology (New York: Scribners, 1958), and “New Testament and Mythology” in Kerygma and Myth, ed. by Hans Werner Bartsch (New York: Harper and Row).
54 For example, see Kallas, Jesus and the Power of Satan, pp. 202-215.
55 Bloesch, The Struggle of Prayer, p. 89.
56 Anne Gimenez appears to support this viewpoint in her chapter, “Battle in the Heavenlies” in Engaging the Enemy, pp. 77-82.
57 Note that Jesus defeats the Enemy by “the finger of God” (v.20), a reference meant to contrast the great power of God to the devil’s overrated control. Rather, Jesus is “the stronger” (v. 22) man who defeats the works of Satan.
58 Grudem, Systematic Theology, p. 421.
59 See also Jude 8-10, where reference is made to Michael disputing with devil over the body of Moses. It is interesting to note that Michael does not rebuke the devil openly, but defers to God (v.9). According to some of the early church fathers, Clement of Alexandria and Origen, Jude is quoting a story from the apocryphal Assumption of Moses. Scant remains of the book survive.
60 Karl Barth, Prayer, 2nd ed. by Don E. Saliers, trans. Sara F. Terrien (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1985), p. 33. My emphasis.
61 See, for example, Harold Bloom’s, The American Religion: The Emergence of the Post-Christian Nation (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1992). Bloom is highly critical of the American Christian experience, which he believes thrives on innovation and enthusiasm as opposed to tradition and rigorous investigation. It is interesting to note that the most influential Christian cults have risen in the United States: Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witness, etc.
62 C. Peter Wagner is professor of Church Growth at Fuller Theological Seminary, School of World Mission and a renowned speaker. He has authored numerous books on the subject of church growth and spiritual gifts.
63 For example, see Wagner’s, “Territorial Spirits” in his edited book, Engaging the Enemy (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1991), pp. 43-49.
64 George Otis, Jr., Informed Intercession (Ventura, CA: Renew, 1999), p. 82.
65 C. Peter Wagner, Breaking Strongholds in Your City (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1993), pp. 19-21.
66 Ibid., p. 20.
67 Ibid.
68 Ibid., p. 14.
69 George Otis, Jr., The Twilight Labyrinth (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 1997), p. 59.
70 Successful stories about large-scale evangelistic results and city-wide revivals form the basis of proof for the practice of spiritual mapping by the central cast of characters: C. Peter Wagner, George Otis, Jr., Cindy Jacobs, and John Dawson.
71 For the full story, see George Otis, Jr.’s, Informed Intercession, pp. 15-50.
72 One of the most powerful and inspiring accounts is that of Julio Ruibal, who was killed by a hit man of the Cali drug cartel outside his church on December 13, 1995. Julio was a remarkable Christian leader in the community and his clear martyrdom unleashed a tremendous revival in the city that thrives to this day. See Otis, Jr., Informed Intercession, pp. 37-47.
73 Ibid., esp. pp. 78-81.
74 Wagner, Breaking Strongholds in Your City, p. 20.
75 For example, Wagner is not shy to use ancient apocryphal and spurious accounts such as, The Acts of John, in his book, Warfare Prayer (Ventura, CA: Regal Books, 1992), pp. 97-99. The problem is that such accounts have no authority and generally reflect the mythical and legendary views of the surrounding cults. The church fathers gave little credence to books such as these.
76 Ibid., pp. 65-66. Nothing in the New Testament comes close to the view of animism, the notion of spirits dwelling in inanimate objects. Paul contradicts such a notion in I Cor. 8:4, which Wagner mentions but doesn’t interpret adequately.
77 See Cindy Jacobs, Possessing the Gates of the Enemy (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, 1991), p. 49.
78 Wagner, Warfare Prayer, p. 83.
79 Ibid. p. 78.
80 This has been a central appeal of the spiritual mapping proponents, to maintain that modern believers are in a state of myopia. Unfortunately, this argument is tantamount to name calling, or in logic, an “ad hominem” argument. Calling people in the West narrow-minded clouds the fact that more people today are very spirit-oriented compared to the previous generation. The problem is few people lack critical judgment and relativism rules—even in our churches, as George Barna has pointed out.
81 Late apologist and philosopher, Francis Schaeffer, performed a great service for the church when he published his work, How Should We Then Live? (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1976). More recently, voices such as Ravi Zacharias, Charles Colson, and William Bennet are heard speaking out on the history that has brought Western culture to this point in time.
Selected Bibliography
Green, Michael. I Believe in Satan’s Downfall. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1981.
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994. pp. 412-436.
Mallone, George. Arming for Spiritual Warfare. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1991.
Page, Sydney H.T. Powers of Evil: A Biblical Study of Satan and Demons. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1995.
