At one extreme we have Charismatics who embrace (at times) an
almost shamanistic or hylozoic view of the world. Demons are in the cupboard,
around the corner and inhabiting everything from my dog to my socks. I was very
disturbed the other day to hear a man recounting that he was being 'held down'
by a demon and as he tried to call out the name of Christ, a Linda Blair-like
gurgling hiss emitted from his mouth accompanied by sinister laughter and
mockery. Even the recounting of it made me shiver and frankly I wonder if the
man isn't possessed. His understanding of Christianity and the doctrines he was
promoting were so deficient and such a convoluted disaster whether possessed or
not, he's sowing confusion and discord.
At the other extreme we have some in the Evangelical and
Reformed camp who (from my perspective) crave societal respectability and seem
to almost labour to de-supernaturalise the faith. They don't go so far as the
Theological Liberals of the Mainline who in many cases don't believe in the supernatural
at all. Many of their pastors are actually agnostics when it comes to the
question of God's existence. I'm not talking about them. Those folks were
rightly identified by JG Machen as being adherents of 'another' religion, a
counterfeit that utilised Christian language and concepts and yet wholly
redefines them in Secular and Humanistic terms.
I'm speaking of Christians who for various reasons seem to
have a problem with acknowledging the demonic. This will stem from various
commitments, too many really to name. For some it's a Redemptive-Historical
issue. This is probably the most valid albeit flawed argument that insists
these occurrences may have been a reality prior to the Cross but today they are
all but eliminated. Some who argue this way are devoted to Postmillennial
theology and argue the world will be Christianised prior to the return of
Christ. They're looking for a future era in which sin will be nearly eradicated
and culture and every aspect of life will be sacralised, made holy and
consecrated to Kingdom service. The reality of the demonic has little place in
their schema. They believe the Kingdom manifest on Earth will all but suppress
and eradicate the activities of the enemy.
Others have embraced forms of Rationalism. This can occur in
both Arminian and Calvinist paradigms. Ironically in terms of epistemology
they're not all that different. But for many the notion of exterior influence,
extra-personal culpability, and issues of coherence with the notion of God's
sovereignty and Providence lead to de
facto if not de jure rejections
of demonic activity.
We could go on extensively but suffice it to say that for
many people they feel foolish in pointing to the demonic when speaking to
unbelieving acquaintances and/or the culture at large. In both cases the
'pearls before swine' adage applies. Lost people aren't going to understand the
issue and some wisdom must be employed when speaking of it to the world. I'm
not suggesting that we speak about these issues when evangelising the lost or condemning
the culture. Identifying world leaders and especially many Christian leaders as
demonic won't further our cause even if it is true.
On a practical level I am not suggesting that we need to go
about being conscious of demons and seeing them around every corner. But I
believe that demonic activity is present both in the world in terms of the
ordering of nations and certainly in the culture. There are many religious
elements to what we as a culture are watching
and doing. And without a doubt this 'partaking of the cup of demons' opens
many unfortunate and unhelpful doors in our own lives.
Soteriological commitments and assumptions come into play
here as well bringing us back to questions regarding rationality and
epistemology. Calvinistic soteriology in the realm of assurance and the
believer's security are unable to reconcile genuine warnings and threats and
thus when the Scripture speaks in these terms (as it often does) they are washed
or explained away through the philosophical exercise and application of
theological paradigm.
Cultural analysis flags and Biblical exegesis suffers
especially in terms of understanding Christian living, Redemptive-History and
Eschatology.
The scope of what I'm suggesting is huge and like many of the
topics I raise could only be properly engaged in something like a proper book,
something I do not at present have the time or resources to entertain.
I wish only to raise the topic for consideration and to make
readers aware of the extremes and suggest the Biblical position is somewhere in
the middle. I'm not saying that out of a spirit of conciliation or some kind of
principle of compromise.
I'm saying it because I believe one camp is all too willing
to be the 'fool' in the culture and yet in rejecting Biblical authority has
strayed into very dangerous waters and in many cases their anti-demonic
activity is in fact demonic and opening the floodgates. They are unwittingly
becoming a vehicle of demonic activity in the world.
And yet the other camp while seeking intellectual
respectability and an abhorrence of cultural rejection has tried to maintain to
Biblical authority but soften the edges as it were, to make its embrace more
palatable in a secular and scientific world. It has affected their hermeneutics
and Biblical exegesis and as a consequent has led to other equally dangerous
compromises in the realm of the mind. I'm thinking of modern psychology and the
materialist approach to some of the surrounding questions.
In addition they are often more than a little dubious regarding
the reality of the occult in terms of telepathy, clairvoyance and other such
phenomena. While it cannot be doubted that many if not most proponents and
practitioners are little more than charlatans it would be a mistake to wholly
discount and ignore the reality.
Arthur Pink was about as Biblically grounded as anyone I can
think of. And he's unique in that he alone of serious students of Scripture had
an occultic background. Before his conversion he had been involved in
Theosophy, a product of the 19th century milieu. Blavatsky, Besant
and Crowley were all names he knew well. Pink utterly rejected their false religion
and yet he firmly believed in the reality of the occult.
He reluctantly testified to the reality of the magical arts.
He had seen some pretty astonishing things during his time in their circles.
While such phenomena such as a plant sprouting and rapidly growing before your
eyes can be explained in terms of illusion and sleight-of-hand, he didn't think
this was the case. He also testified to the reality of clairvoyant 'remote
viewing' that one could 'see' what people were doing across great distances.
Was Pink insane or mistaken? His testimony on these matters
as slight as it is and difficult to find is quite revealing and we wish he had
spoken more about it. He was tormented by his past and the reality of the
demonic and yet his response is so very different from what we encounter with
modern Charismatics.
Another author who had some interesting things to say in this
regard was English author Alan Morrison. I say 'was' because even though he's
still around he doesn't seem to be preaching or writing anymore. He went
through trials and ordeals to be sure. I never fully agreed with his views of
the New Age. He's views in many ways align with teachers such as Gary Kah.
They're not altogether mistaken but off-base enough to the point that I cannot
recommend them. Kah in particular is corrupted by his American bias. Dave
Hunt's book 'America, the Sorcerer's New Apprentice' was corrupted by many of
the same errors, a confusion of American culture, Christendom and the forces at
work within it. Interesting reads but deeply flawed.
Morrison (more or less a Reformed Baptist) was excellent in
exposing both the nature of demonic activity in the Charismatic realm as well
as the repackaging of Eastern mysticism in the West. Again, Kah and Hunt also
take on this 're-packaging' element but I think Morrison was a bit more sober
and reflective. His book 'The Serpent and the Cross' was a good read, though I
admit I haven't picked it up in over 15 years (at least). I don't even know
where my copy is at present.
Morrison was probably best known for his criticisms of
movements such as the Toronto Blessing which some will recall was quite the
rage about twenty years ago. You can still find a video or two of Morrison
criticising it on YouTube. Most of his materials have disappeared from the
Internet. I think he believed he was under threat. He had angered a lot people
and ended up all but fleeing England. I spoke with him via telephone back in
2002 or 2003 while he was living in Southern France.
In
conclusion I fear that 'delusion' can take many forms. It can manifest itself
in an 'over-embrace' of the spiritual and yet at the same time there is a real
danger in minimising these realities. The quest for respectability is but another
road that leads to destruction in the end. We need to be willing to be fools
from Christ. But as I said I think there are a host of factors at work that
prevent many Christians from fully embracing what the Scriptures teach on these
points. Their deficient doctrine of the demonic is but one aspect or symptom of
a larger problem at work when it
comes to embracing Scripture.
If we are fully committed to Biblical Authority these
questions need to be constantly re-addressed and worked out. Creedalism, Confessionalism
and Scholastic Method have unfortunately closed the door and cut-off access to
even raising some of these questions.
There are other concerns, trends within the culture and so
forth that I think are pertinent to this discussion but beyond what I wish to
touch on here. God willing in time they can be broached.