Ya Basic: The Calvinism Edition

Hey there. Hi. How are you? Long time no see. I have been absolutely, head-spinningly, crazy busy. But here we are, on the eleventh day of February in 2020 and I’m finally writing the first real blog article of the year. Those who have hung around here before and know me, know this: I’m a big believer in an examined faith. If we don’t take the time to examine what we believe and why, we can end up with all sorts of crazy theologies in our heads and a lot of them can be nothing more than glorified superstition. In a time when the evangelical church is coming under increasing, and I believe deserved, scrutiny, Biblical knowledge a noble pursuit.

The truth is, it is easy to walk into churches that feel good, sound good and speak about nice things, but be none the wiser when it comes to what they believe. I also believe that, with the emergence of a trend towards going independent, ideas can permeate the pulpit and sound original, but hail from older theologies. Is this a bad thing? Not always. I’m all for modernising the word and making it more understandable and accessible. But here’s the thing: older theologies often have a little more conversation and criticism around them, meaning it is easier to see what is solid and what isn’t.

Before I delve into the basics of one of the big thinkers of the Protestant Reformation (circa the 1500’s), I want to say this: I’m a layperson. I don’t have a theology degree. I don’t claim to know it all. I’m just a regular Jo, working her way through life and trying to do her best with faith and followership. There are whole books arguing for and against this next topic! I’m just giving you my super quick cooks tour of it.

Without further ado, meet John Calvin. The TULIP guy.

The 1500’s were a turbulent time for Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church, which had enjoyed a position of privilege in society, was undergoing the throes of what would later become known as the Protestant Reformation – a significant split from the institution. John Calvin was a French theologian born into a catholic family but later went protestant after studying philosophy, humanism and law. He stepped up to the plate in the mid 1500’s and began to help popularise a few things ideas that have hung on until today, namely; belief in the sovereignty of God in all things, and the doctrine of predestination.

Why did I call him the TULIP Guy? Because he had five points and the best acronym people have come up with for that is a flower. (Hey, I like flowers!) Christianity.com briefly explains the five main points of Calvinism as this:

1. Total Depravity – asserts that as a consequence of the fall of man into sin, every person is enslaved to sin. People are not by nature inclined to love God, but rather to serve their own interests and to reject the rule of God.

2. Unconditional Election – asserts that God has chosen from eternity those whom he will bring to himself not based on foreseen virtue, merit, or faith in those people; rather, his choice is unconditionally grounded in his mercy alone. God has chosen from eternity to extend mercy to those he has chosen and to withhold mercy from those not chosen.

3. Limited Atonement – asserts that Jesus’s substitutionary atonement was definite and certain in its purpose and in what it accomplished. This implies that only the sins of the elect were atoned for by Jesus’s death.

4. Irresistible Grace – asserts that the saving grace of God is effectually applied to those whom he has determined to save (that is, the elect) and overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel, bringing them to a saving faith. This means that when God sovereignly purposes to save someone, that individual certainly will be saved.

5. Perseverance of the Saints – asserts that since God is sovereign and his will cannot be frustrated by humans or anything else, those whom God has called into communion with himself will continue in faith until the end.

Okay! Big ideas here. Big ideas that have permeated church until today. I always used to just think “Yep, okay cool” when it came to Calvinism, but the more I grow in my faith and deconstruction, the more I can see some fundamental flaws in the logic. Most of them pertain to the middle three points. Let’s start with unconditional election: the idea that we are either doomed to hell or destined for heaven from the dawn of time is something I find deeply troubling. We have scriptures such as John 3:16 (For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son that *whosoever* believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life) or Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 that guarantee that anyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

Then there is Romans 5:18 that says “as through one transgression, there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness, there resulted justification of life to all.”  1 Timothy 2:24 talks about Gods desire for all to be saved, and Titus 2:11 speaks about God bringing salvation to all. 2 Peter 3:9 says that God’s desire is that none should perish. These scriptures seem to be at odds not only with unconditional election, but the idea of limited atonement too.

The idea that there is an in crowd  destined for heaven and an out crowd destined for hell, and we have no choice as to which crowd we are in, is deeply flawed. Yes, I know there is that verse that says “many are called but few are chosen.” This is an unsettling parable that shows that even though the invitation to salvation goes out to all, only some show up. These are the chosen. The elect. And there is Ephesians 1:4 that refers to the elect that God has chosen before the foundation of the world. So I can see where Calvin was getting his ideas from. However, the greater story arc that stretches through the Bible shows the nature of God to be one where He wants to redeem all. Why would he then only redeem some and eternally doom the rest from before their time on earth begins?

All of this hails back to the idea of predestination and God’s sovereignty: ie. that we cannot change what God has already decided so we are sealed in our fate. Now, both of these can be argued biblically both ways. We could have two skilled debaters on the platform using only biblical knowledge as their argument and it would make sense.

But for me, there is a chink in the chain mail. Why send your only begotten son to die for only some? Why create a soul that you love, that you care for, only to decide from the outset that they are destined to burn. We are introduced to God as being “love” and as being a loving father. As a parent, this speaks to me. I have two beautiful kids. You want me to choose one to live forever in a glorious afterlife and the other to burn for eternity?

Nope. I’m choosing both of my kids for the good stuff. No one burns. So that’s me, with two kids. Two kids I love so much I’d walk through fire for them. I’m not writing either one of them out of the will. I love them, thus I will do everything I can for them.

In pulpits everywhere, we are taught about God’s unconditional and sacrificial love for us. It’s an argument seated solidly in scripture. How then are we supposed to argue that only some of us actually have tickets to take advantage of it, especially given all the scriptures I quoted above.

Now I get it; if God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and all the omni’s, then He already sees and knows our choices. He already sees and knows who will take Him up on the offer of salvation. But does that mean that it is not freely offered to all? I think not. A hard core calvinist, when asking themselves a few questions would have to come to the conclusion that God knew and even desired for sin to enter the world from the beginning, that there is no point praying to bring unbelievers to faith because its either going to happen or not anyway, that Jesus didn’t die for everybody, and if we take the concept of predestination to the extreme, that God ordained things like the holocaust, murders, tragedies or sexual crimes.

Now to the idea of irresistible grace – that if we are the elect, nothing we can do can separate us from God’s grace and atonement. It’s a lovely idea. So lovely. I believe in the all sufficiency of God’s grace. However, the idea that the elect get this conscience clearing superpass to heaven no matter what they do, while those who are not in the elect get the short straw and go to hell no matter what they do is troubling.

It paints God as a masochist. A bit of an arsehole dad – who made a whole bunch of kids and decided a large portion of them weren’t good enough to eat at the family table, and who killed one of them to redeem only some of them.

Now to the idea of total depravity. Okay – I have no problem with the idea of sin. Sin, as falling short of a lofty, Godlike standard is just the human condition. We are all flawed in some way. We are all great in some way. We are all doing the best we can. But calling it total depravity is a whole new level.

To say “For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” is a recognition of our human flaws. It is a recognition that we are not God and we need God. I like that. I’m fine with that.

Now look to your local maternity ward. Inside the nursery, swaddled in whites, are tiny babies. They are so new to the world that they don’t have a functioning prefrontal cortex. They don’t have awareness of what is right and wrong. They have awareness of hunger, tiredness and discomfort. This is not total depravity. This is innocence.

I have two preschoolers. Even in all the tantrums and tears and the selfishness of always wanting the bigger slice or the cooler toy, I can’t call it total depravity. Inside their brains is a firestorm of growth. They are learning who they are apart from me. They are learning how to assert themselves, and the difference between justified frustration and an unjustified tantrum. Even now, I can’t call their poor decision making total depravity. Because as frustrating as it is, it is innocent.

If you argue that total depravity sets in at the point where a person has a fully functioning prefrontal cortex and can make conscious decisions, then fine. But answer me this: the emergence of the atheist movement over time seems to have shown that people can be altruistic and seek to create a better world even if they aren’t Christians. It seems to show that ethics and unconditional love aren’t the domain of the redeemed alone. I look to those who campaign for human rights and I see God in them regardless of whether or not they believe.

At what point then, do we become totally depraved? You can look at the Ted Bundy’s of the world and think “Yep, depraved.” You can look at the Hitlers of the world and think “Heck. Absolutely. Depraved.” But a four-year old who just wants to faceplate directly into the top of the watermelon instead of waiting for mummy to slice it? He’s just learning patience and doing badly at it.

For all have sinned, fine. For all are flawed, absolutely. Depraved? I can’t come at that. We are all just doing our best. It’s just a shame our best isn’t Godlike, or the world would be a more peaceful place.

Look – I was going to try and argue for Calvinism. But it turns out I can’t. Someone else can! Heck, if you feel like it, pop me a note and you can guest blog on it! Be my guest!

The Bible is a complex document. It is rich in historical and cultural context that we often miss. The Protestant Reformation was an important time in history where mankind started to re-take the reigns of faith that had been handed off to the clergy. It gave us an opportunity to participate in faith to a whole new degree. It was an important development.

But there is a line somewhere in the Bible that says God builds line upon line, and precept upon precept. We, as Christians, progressives even, in the year 2020, need to take our faith and understanding further. And that means understanding what it is built on now.

Until next time, 
Kit K, predestined since the beginning of time to write this blog article and publish it without proofreading it on February 11th 2020. 

Peace

PSA: God Doesn’t Kill People in Bushfires

Okay. My least favourite athlete is back in the news – perhaps because he and Margaret Court like to compete for titles (like Australia’s biggest homophobe). I joke. I joke. But he claimed this weekend that the bushfires in Queensland are God’s judgement for abortion and marriage equality laws. When lives are lost in natural disasters and an accusation like this comes out, it’s no joke. But sadly, it’s not even new. Daniel Naliah made the same claim about abortion law and bushfires back in 2009. 

It was outrageous and unbiblical then, and it’s outrageous and unbiblical now. But with lives lost, Imma drop a microblog on it to drop a few Biblical truthbombs.

Here they are. I’m sure there is more, but here’s the start:

• Isaiah 51:6 describes some pretty heavy weather but promises his salvation shall endure. (I.e. He doesn’t kill people via extreme weather)

•  Luke 9:56 says Jesus came to save our lives not destroy them.

•  Matt 18:4 says it’s not God’s will that even one should perish.

• Noah’s flood, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah occurred before the Old Testament/New Testament split whereby Jesus took the judgement of Mankind.

• Even if this wasn’t the case, Abraham negotiated with God in Genesis 18:16ff and God said that if there were even 10 good men in Sodom and Gomorrah, he wouldn’t destroy it. I know there are more than 10 good men in Australia.

This is a long way of say that Izzy Folau’s statements are unbiblical, unfounded fear-mongering that does nothing but tarnish the name and perceived-nature of God. God doesn’t kill people because of law changes. But maybe we should pay some attention to climate change (which, believe it or not is not a religious issue! You can be a Christian and reject single use plastic because it’s bad for the environment).

Anyway. Hi! It’s Monday. Hope your’s is good. It’s going to be a huge week on the blog here, and I’m working really hard on some kicking’ content for you. If you haven’t subscribed yet, get on it friends. You won’t want to miss Thursday’s piece.

Have a great week, safe in the knowledge that God isn’t  burning Australia down or causing crippling drought. Comforting, yeah?

Kit K.

Deliverance: What the Hell?

I debated putting the word “Heck” in the subject line there, but look – I’m partial to a truly awful pun. However, I’m not partial to truly awful theology and/or spiritual abuse. Hence, I need to pull on my big girl panties and talk about what I said I’d talk about at the close of my last article: deliverance. It came at the conclusion of a discussion about mental health and Christians, specifically whether or not Christians can suffer from depression. For the longest time, depression, anxiety or other mental illnesses have carried an unfortunate inference in Christian circles: that they may be somehow, in some cases, spiritually underpinned. Read my last piece for my thoughts about that. But now we move on to the chunkier part of the argument: deliverance. Oh brother. 

I’ll start with a story, perhaps a cautionary tale. Once upon a time, I was struggling with a few dud hands life had dealt me. I found a counsellor that did wonders. I was making progress. Then I got in a *ahem* discussion with my pastor. He “suggested” strongly that I drop that counsellor and do something else. I said, “No thank you, this is working and I want to stick with it.” Next came a big reaction and the “suggestion” that I fly to a neighbouring country to go through a power-deliverance experience with a minister flown in from America. When I say “Power-deliverance” I mean the hard-core evangelical experience of being prayed over and having someone command spirits to come out of you. That was not my cup of tea, because I wasn’t dealing with demons. I was dealing with grief, loss and a few weird/traumatic curveballs. Even if this wasn’t the case, it still didn’t exactly sit right with me.

Anyway. The message I got from that interaction was “You are under the influence of demons. They need to be cast out of you.” I was flabbergasted. I sat on the couch and blinked while my wonderful husband recognised the signs of PTSD raising its head again and flew in to bat for me.

Thank God he did. Because I believe a power-deliverance experience like that would have been profoundly damaging for two reasons: It would have been administered without true consent, only guilt and shame over alleged “demonic influence” that would have lead me to discount the validity of my choice in all of this, and because being in the atmosphere described by the people who went to see this deliverance person would have undoubtedly triggered my PTSD. That would have looked like some evidence of demonic influence, and a vicious cycle would have continued. Gentle, qualified counselling however, worked great. (Side note: I am doing very well now. Thanks for asking!)

I tell this story for a couple of reasons: the practice of “deliverance” isn’t gone from the church. Not even close. Christian mega-church “Bethel” recently launched a gay conversion therapy program which would likely have some element of deliverance in it. If you plug the term “deliverance ministry” into a search engine, you will get all sorts of hits. But simplest truth is this: many Christian people have experienced it. Some feel good about it. Some say they feel good about it. Some really don’t.

I admit I sit in a place of privilege here. I know my own mind. I know the Bible to a fairly decent (though not scholarly) degree. I’m well read. I am a level-headed and self-assured person who has witnessed a good many Christian lurks and quirks over the years. It is with all of this in mind that I assert the following: there are three types of deliverance. You probably REALLY don’t need the third.

I’ll say straight off the bat that this is an uncomfortable topic for me. But I’m writing about it because as the NAR and Neocharismatic movements gain speed,  as pseudo-Christian doctrines can be taken up without so much as a reference check, and as paganism and Christian spiritual warfare appear to show significant overlap in the Venn-diagram of modern spiritual practices, its important to know BS when you see it. And its important to know what you need, and your rights when you are speaking with the clergy.

Before you say it: Yes, Jesus engaged in power-deliverance in the New Testament. We see it when he cast the demons out of the man who self-identified as having a legion of demons within him (Mark 5, Luke 8). Now, this is an interesting one, because we are talking here about a raving lunatic so dangerous he could not be held with chains. We also witness Jesus converse with the man and then agree to send the evil spirits into the pigs (2000 of them. Bacon exports from the Gerasene Region were poor that week).  

Now: we don’t know what significant psychiatric disorder this man may have had. We know he lived in a time where modern medicine did not exist, but spiritual practice was a lot more common. He was dealing with God made flesh, who had perfect knowledge of the situation. Therefore human error is removed from the equation.

The world has changed. Deliverance practitioners are now thoroughly and completely human with imperfect knowledge. They are largely unqualified (I mean, I haven’t read of a university with a degree in casting out demons – have you?). We have modern medicine that can bring calm when needed. We have anti-psychotic medication for extreme cases like the Gerasene man in Luke 8 and Mark 5). There is literally no reason or excuse for someone in 2019 to be forced into an exorcism. (When I say forced, I mean forced literally, or made to feel such shame that they submit under emotional duress). By and large, I don’t think this is what happened in the Gerasene case (but that’s a much larger conversation – too big for this tiny blog)

And side note: in John 8: 52, Jesus was told he was demon-possessed and then the pharisees tried to stone him. So thats fun. ANYWAY! On to the meaty part of this blog article. What do I believe every Christian needs to know about deliverance?

The first type of deliverance is Salvation. When you read through the gospels and their account of Jesus death on the cross for the forgiveness of sins and humankinds reconciliation to God through Him, you read a powerful, all-encompassing and complete process. John 19:30 sees Jesus utter “it is finished.” Revelation 1:18 and surrounding scriptures chronicle Jesus’ descent into Hades to take the keys of death and hell. Ephesians 1:7 and 13 talk about the gifts of salvation and of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps most poignantly Phillipians 2:11 says “At the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” I.e. Once you believe in Jesus and have accepted the gift of the Holy Spirit who dwells in you, that’s it. This is the bit where you can all sing Stevie Wonder’s “Signed, sealed, delivered.”

I could delve into all sorts of exegesis and hermeneutics about all the scriptures used here, but that would be a thesis in and of itself. The critical takeaway point is this: what Jesus did is thorough, complete and a finished work of deliverance in and of itself. We accept that then there’s no space left open for demonic possession. Ephesians 1:13 even calls it the “Seal” of the Holy Spirit. To say that someone can be born again and still demon possessed is a fallacy.

Another day, I will debate what salvation means. But for now, I’ll point you to Romans 10:9 and John 3:16 and get on with my day.

The second type of deliverance is the word of God. Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians will likely be familiar with the old exclusion clause that helps deliverance ministries get around the complete nature of deliverance at the point of salvation. They say things like “Okay. You aren’t possessed, because if you are a Christian you can’t be, but you might be under the influence.” This is where the second type of deliverance comes in: it is the gradual strengthening of a person as they know more about the word and nature of God, and know more about their own mind and how it works.  Romans 12:1-2 says “Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind that you may prove what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.”

I like the word “prove” here. I think of a math proof – where the answer to a problem is explained via the process the mathematician used to get there.  It’s not a matter of having someone pray for you to be all transformed and then “wham bam” I’ve totally changed how I think. That simply doesn’t last. Its the crash diet of Christianity. Old habits return. We see this in the parable of the empty house in Matthew 12:43-45 (where the tenant is evicted from the house, returns finding it empty, and brings seven friends back). It’s a simple illustration that we can’t just get rid of one way of thinking, living and being, and replace it with nothing. Old habits die hard. That’s why we learn, we study. We take in the scriptures, think about them, enact them and have them become part of our lives. It’s a gradual process of transformation and frankly, it’s beautiful.

Now I’m going to do something heretical here and suggest that the use of the word ‘mind’ in this scripture should suggest to us that we look after the mind in the same way we do the body. i.e. If there is something not quite right, we get help. If you are a reader of my blog, you’ll know I love therapy. I don’t just go when I’m not doing well. I go when I’m doing well so I might learn to do better. The wisdom I have gained from understanding how my mind works has been life-changing. I recently spoke to a person who had been advised by her pastors not to go see a secular therapist and had lived with decades of torment. My heart broke for her. That is bad advice. It’s like telling someone only to go to a Christian doctor when the only specialists available to save a life might be non-Christian.

A good therapist is qualified in the science of Psychology. They will counsel you towards your goals and in accordance with your own values. You will get value out of it. It’s worth shopping around for. So here is the heretical bit: the ‘mind’ is hard to define, but its largely thought of as the brain in action. When the Dalai Lama asked “Can the mind change the brain” in the 1980’s, he was laughed at. Then science caught on to what he was talking about, and now we have a far better understanding that we run our brains. They don’t run us. The field of neuroplasticity is proof of this.

There is a long-held argument in Christian circles that our mind and our spirit are different things: that we are a tripartite being comprising mind, spirit and body.  However, there is another, lesser-known theory buried within Christian scholarship that holds to a dichotomy rather than a trichotomy. I err on the side of ‘dichotomy’. But regardless of which side you come down on, here is something I believe solidly: While you are learning about your faith, your God, and your guidebook (being the Bible), it is a good thing to also learn about yourself. Was it Socrates who said, “Know thyself?” It is a profound and beautiful thing when you can reflect on your own growth, or reflect on how the Bible in all its complexity might help you grow. This growth, led by the word and spirit of God, is a form of deliverance.

So now for the third type of deliverance: the power ministries. Green vomit. Exorcisms. Etc. I did a bit of searching on this before writing this blog piece. I was aghast to discover that it hasn’t really progressed in its rational or methodology since Derek Prince Ministries released a document on it in 1985. Detailed in that document was a whole lot of demonology in dot point format with no real rationale or exegesis attached to it. I’m sure, in other corners of the internet, there is better documentation on it. I’m also sure that people can use all sorts of out of context scriptural arguments to back up their positions. The fact of the matter is that for the most part, the stuff I’ve read has relied upon “divine revelation” to spell out how to approach exorcism. This, for me, is wildly concerning.

Now I want to flag a danger here: it is so easy for the area of exorcism to cross over into abuse. It is so easy for it to happen without genuine or even explicit consent. It is so easy for a person to be shamed into it, or for it to be based on bad theology.

This is dangerous. So very dangerous. It is my belief that, in this day and age, it should be avoided at all costs.  When the first two deliverance options are complete in nature and process, there is no need for the third. If you feel there is a need for the third, I’d encourage medical assistance, counselling and more time dedicated the process of healing and transformation before you opt for the third. Do the work first. In life, as in mental health or even diets, you can’t cut corners. This could be a serious psychiatric problem that exorcisms might only make worse.

I’ve seen a few of these “casting out demons” moments in my time. If anything, I believe it gave someone an experience that was profound enough to allow them to tell themself a different story and empower them towards recovery. I cannot tell you what else (if anything) happened. But sometimes that’s all that is needed: that boost that allows the mind to break out of the familiar pathways it has been caught in for years and experience something new. But in other situations, all I can see in power-deliverance ministries is bad theology and stage-craft. I am not all-knowing. There might be something in it. But for me, it’s a hard pass. Leave it to the Son of God and the original apostles. Guiding people through the first two options, and when needed referring to mental health professionals, should be all we need.

I don’t discount the power of prayer. It is clearly Biblical. It is clearly a practice that has carried down through cultures and generations. It can be helpful and calming.  If someone needs or requests prayer for assistance, then more power to them. Support them. But don’t overstep the mark of what they are actually asking for. God isn’t waiting for someone to pray for you so He can do something. He already sent Jesus to do it. He needs no middle man. And I can’t stress this enough: shame, guilt, or feeling like someone thinks you need deliverance doesn’t mean you need to go through with an exorcism.

A moment of willingness to seek out or submit to prayer should not be used as an opportunity to be subjected to exorcisms or power-deliverance. I believe that this is an overstepping of consent at best, and spiritual abuse at worst. If in your own time you experience some profound moment in which something becomes clear and you become changed, wonderful. Bookmark that moment and celebrate it. But for someone else to step into that place and do it for you concerns me a little.

The human mind/spirit is an amazing thing. In it dwells the power to hurt and heal, grow and change, learn and develop. When we harness that mind in combination with faith in a Saviour who has done all the supernatural stuff that will ever be needed, then we have a complete picture of deliverance.

That, I believe, is all we need.

Peace
Kit K.

Can Christian’s Suffer From Depression?

It seems that my corner of the interwebs is all lit up with mental health awareness messages this week. It’s possibly because of ‘RUOK? Day’ that just passed in Australia, possibly because its Mental Health Awareness Month in the United States, and possibly because I follow a lot of people on Twitter who are grieving the death of Jarrid Wilson. He was a pastor and mental health advocate who tragically lost his battle with depression, even more tragically it was on the day he officiated the funeral of another Christian who lost her battle with depression. In amongst the outpouring of grief, the voice of ignorance seems to have raised itself in the form of people who assert that Christians can’t have mental illnesses, or that suffering from a mental illness disqualifies them from the ministry. This is a dangerous belief; one that is unbiblical and unhelpful at best, and flat out dangerous at worst. In a time when mental illness is thought to affect up to 25% of us, its not good enough to turn a deaf ear to such rubbish. So let’s talk about it.

First cab off the rank: Can Christians Suffer from Mental Illness? Short answer? Yes, they can. But of course, there is more to it than that. For some, this question stems from the NAR/Bethel-Esque belief that total healing from all conditions is guaranteed at the point of salvation. Thus, if someone is born again in Christ, they won’t suffer from mental illness, or indeed any other illness (!!! More on that later). For others, it comes from an antiquated and even subconscious belief that mental illness is demonic or spiritual in origin. Now, thankfully most Christian’s will at least acknowledge that some depression can have neurological or physiological origins. But others hold to the idea that depression is a spiritual, demonic or sin-related malady.

*sigh*

The latter is not helpful. And it’s not true.

Let me switch out my “Christian blogger” hat for my “Research blogger” hat for a second. Here’s what research tells us about depression: it is neurological. Every time. It is physiological. Every time. Why? Because thoughts, feelings, ruminations and such all take place in the brain which is a physical and neurological thing, and having stressors (whether they are physical, chemical or emotional) often factor into the etiology of depressive disorders. The research is a little fuzzy on why serotonin reuptake inhibitors help in a lot of cases, but it seems to have something to do with the neurotransmitters that help signals jump from one neuron to another (i.e. that lovely serotonin in your brain and gut that bathes your neurocircuitry).

There is also emerging research that indicates depression is an inflammation issue, and there are well-established links between mental health and gut health (with the gut being home to the enteric nervous system which houses billions of neurons and communicates to the brain via the vagus nerve and the gut-brain axis. I.e. Many depression sufferers have gut problems, too.

Depression is physical. Read that again. Depression is a physical issue. It’s time we stopped treating mental health as some ethereal, intangible thing. Its time we stopped saying “Oh its all in your head.” Guess what: your head is a tangible thing. Your brain is a tangible thing. If its all in your head, it exists. The thoughts of the mind (with the mind being the brain in action) can be seen on brain scans in the form of neuronal pathways lighting up on the screen. The activity of the limbic system (which governs our emotions) is something that can be measured. We can also measure sympathetic function (the sympathetic nervous system is the part of the nervous system that fires up under stress, and kicks our survival mechanisms into play). Thus, mental illness is tangible in many ways. (Research blogger hat now removed, FYI)

So when you ask yourself if a Christian can have depression, you are really asking whether a Christian can experience physical illness, inflammation, chronic or acute stress, or gut problems. If you can have diarrhea after you eat something you shouldn’t, your Christian brother or sister can have depression. One is no more demonic than the other. Yes, one is more short term than the other (hopefully!) but the point still stands.

Have you ever taken a panadol/Tylenol or aspirin for a headache? Have you ever put an icepack on a sprained ankle or knee? Have you ever gone to the doctor for an upset tummy or other condition? It might have been easy to say that it’s okay for you to suffer from those ailments because its just life, yet turn to depression and related illnesses and say “but that’s not.”

That, right there, is hypocritical. I’m coming out of the gate firing on this one because it matters. If we apply shame is to physical, neurological, chemical conditions that manifest as depression or other mental illnesses we may inadvertently create a situation in which someone may feel shame in getting help. This is the danger of bad theology. It can, quite literally, put a life at risk. People! Let’s not do this! Let’s make churches a safe place for someone to say “I think I’m depressed” and receive support in getting help – not shame or demotions.

It is my belief that depression should not be treated as a spiritual issue. It should be treated as a very real, very serious condition that requires a holistic approach for treatment. That approach should include professional (qualified) help such as counselling and medication. It should include diet and exercise (which is often prescribed as part of the action plan). The place where church should come into a Christian’s action plan is that it should provide community, pastoral support, an opportunity to connect in a positive environment, receive peace and encouragement through scripture (etc), and receive prayer for encouragement or healing if if IF the depression sufferer asks for it. *The latter should never be administered as the sole approach to recovery.* I say this as a person who has been ashamed to admit that attempts at faith healing had failed. In my case it was shoulder and elbow damage after an accident. It was obvious my conditions hadn’t been healed and I felt shame. The hidden shame when a mental illness isn’t healed by faith could be dangerous.

I do believe in prayer. I do believe that when we turn to God, He can perform miracles. I don’t believe that should be the only approach with mental illness. To limit “treatment” to faith healing could be deadly because it could cause a person to feel shame or failure if it doesn’t work. Worse still, it could cause them to feel pressure to act like all is well, or discontinue other treatment. I sweat at the thought.

A particularly concerning doctrine regarding and all healing is an increasingly prevalent belief in some NAR churches that healing from all maladies is guaranteed at the point of salvation. I mentioned it at the top of this piece and I’ll mention it again here: it’s not true and it’s not helpful. We can’t measure the quality of our salvation on whether or not our cancerous tumours disappeared when we said the prayer. Nor can we measure it on whether or not our depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, bipolar, (etc. etc. etc.) disappeared when we said the prayer. Some people may get healed when they invite Jesus into their hearts. GOOD for them. Some people may take years to heal. Good for them. Others may be healed in eternity. Good for them. The fact is every walk with God is different and none should be judged against another.

Paul had a “thorn in his side.” Jacob had a limp. No one would look at them and say “disqualified.” God certainly wouldn’t. We shouldn’t do this to people who suffer mental illness.

Now to the question of whether or not someone should be in the ministry if they suffer from depression or another mental illness. I’d like to turn your attention to King David. As the author of many of the Psalms, it has often been questioned whether his natural artistry and melancholy crossed the line into depression or bipolar disorder. It’s possible! Some of those Psalms are dark! But he was called ‘a man after God’s own heart,’ depression or not. Then there is Elijah the prophet: perhaps the clearest example of burnout or depression in ministry, when the burdens of the call proved too much to bear and he felt the need to hide in a cave for three years and not look after himself (thank God for sending the birds as a catering service). Jeremiah was called the weeping prophet. King Saul had moments of extreme darkness (not that he was a pillar of godliness, I know). All these illustrate the point that the personal struggles or mental illnesses of some of the greatest Bible heroes did not disqualify them from serving God.

Nor should it disqualify our modern ministers from serving God. What it should mean is better support around them, and medical help if required. It should mean that their occupational oversight makes sure they take their holidays every year to recharge the batteries and that stress or complexity is well-managed within the context of their role. It shouldn’t mean they feel shame over their condition or hide it from those around them while wondering why God hasn’t cured them yet.

In a secular workplace, you might feel the need to take extended leave if you were suffering to the point where it was affecting your job. A pastor may need that from time to time if his or her condition is serious or worrying, or that sharing other peoples burdens (as they so often do) is proving too much. That should be okay. I see it as the duty of care the denomination or oversight owes to their pastor. (If a church is independent, this would be difficult. Yet another reason I’m cautious of independent churches – but that’s another topic for another day).

So if you are a minister or a Christian feeling shame about mental illness – please don’t. We didn’t see God shaming Elijah, David, Noah, or many others for their walks with the black dog. You are loved as you are, valued as you are, and precious to God as you are – but don’t mess around with this illness. Please. You deserve care and the best chance at recovery.

“Now Kit, you’ve taken a very unspiritual look at this problem,” I hear you say. “Where does spiritual stuff fit in?” I know many people still believe there is potential spiritual involvement in illnesses including mental illnesses. I have heard of people doing prayer counselling to remove generational curses and such. I’m going to do another piece on this because it’s a loaded topic so come back next week for that one. But here’s the scoop: there are three forms of deliverance. The first happens at the point of salvation. The second happens more gradually, as we consume and internalise the word of God. The third is so rare and problematic I’d almost call it needless in a modern setting where the consent issue can push it over into spiritual abuse.

While it is obvious that Jesus cast out spirits in some extreme cases in the New Testament (the one with Legion and the herd of pigs in Mark 5/Luke 8 for example), He had the benefit of one thing: He was God and had perfect insight into the situation. He was yet to give His life for the redemption of humanity. He was yet to send the Holy Spirit as our helper, counsellor and guide. These are benefits that we now have. To invoke power-deliverance ministries and ignore the health-related fields dedicated to a more gentle and therapeutic approach to mental illness is, in my opinion, needless and dangerous. As Christians, as the living representation of Christ on earth, it is our duty to tread very carefully with the most vulnerable of people. But more on that next week.

I hope you’re intrigued. See you again soon

Peace
Kit K

Christian Spiritual Warfare: The Occult Crossover

I remember a visiting preacher coming to church ten or so years ago. He strode to the platform, took the microphone from my Dad’s outstretched hand, greeted us and then began his sermon by hanging something on the pulpit. A large map of our country unfurled. I’ll never forget the silent reaction. Double chins appeared all over the congregation as people pulled their faces back in a collective “Ergh, what is that?” The map was covered in splattered blood.

Okay, it turns out it was nail polish. The sermon was on blood splattering – spiritual warfare by symbolically splattering the blood where God reveals. In retrospect, it was a manifestation of spiritual mapping, like that which C. Peter Wagner referred to.

But the thing is, washing by the blood of Jesus is a metaphorical thing that happens at the point of salvation. Its something you enter into by faith not nail polish. As to whether one needs to splatter  ‘blood’ anywhere in order for the land to be returned to God, well I’d argue Psalm 24:1 – The earth is the Lords and the fullness thereof, and the people who dwell within.

But now that argument is done with, lets talk about the stewards of the Earth. Us – people of faith be it Christian, Islamic, Pagan or otherwise, people of no faith, people of colour, whities, traditional owners of the land, recipients of the spoils of colonialism – I gag a bit on that last one now that I understand the damage of colonialism a little better.  The point is, I don’t believe God is so insecure over what happens with the Earth. He knows the Endgame. Its us mere mortals that need to keep a watch over our own actions and intentions.

It seems to me that the practice of spiritual warfare is dreadfully uninformed. Not only do we not understand the full impact of the finished work of Christ, but we in Christendom seem to have a very poor grasp on the nature and power of the rituals we enact “in the name of God.” So dear Christian friend, let’s talk about some of the rituals that Christian Spiritual Warfare may have actually borrowed from  occultism.

Destruction by Fire and Controlling the Elements

I mentioned in my last article that if you’ve ever been involved in a burning party, you needed to read this. Well here’s the soft opening. “Destruction rituals by fire are very pagan,” says Carrie Maya. “I use fire to destroy things literally and figuratively all the time. Fire is one of the four elements acknowledged and invoked in the oldest shamanic, earth-based spiritual traditions that exist. Often seen as being a living entity in and of itself—with it’s own energy of destruction and creation. It can also just be seen as a symbol of these things without being supernatural in nature.”

Carrie’s statement shed interesting light on my experience as a teen. I remember being about 15 and at a youth group event in the back yard of a farmhouse belonging to a church family. The fire barrel was blasting with heat, and into that barrel went Korn t-shirts and CD’s, Weezer CD’s, band posters, romance novels, old letters, you name it. We gleefully destroyed our items and snapped pictures with our (film) cameras hoping to capture images of demons dancing in the flames. I laugh now. And I want the weezer CD back (Okay, the Weezer CD belonged to my future husband, but still.)

As for whether or not the ritual worked or was necessary, I don’t know. It was certainly spiritual, as evidenced by our intent and by Carrie’s example. But was it something the scripture instructed us to do? Not so much. In fact, I can’t find an example in scripture. Examples of sacrifice by fire always sacrificed something acceptable to God. Something living. God has no want or need for our band CD’s and trashy romance novels. Yet the ritual was spiritual, and oh so common in Christian and occult practice.

Its interesting to note, while we speak of one of the elements, that spiritual warfare has been used to target weather patterns. Carrie remarks, “Controlling the elements (earth, water, wind, fire, spirit) is occultic. I don’t think it’s bad. I’m just saying that this has existed since long before Christianity. So when we have Christians commanding tornadoes, tsunamis, storms, and fires to do things, it’s essentially spellcraft.“

This should make us stop and reflect: in the last entry in this series, we discussed how the difference between spell craft and Christian prayer lay largely in the dichotomy between “my will be done” and “Thy will be done.” Yet if we aren’t even cognisant of the line that delineates the difference between Christian spiritual warfare and witchcraft, how can we be sure where we stand?

Modern Extremes: I.e. Grave Soaking

I’ll admit to being rather aghast when I saw this video of a group of Bethel congregants “Grave soaking.”  This was the act of going to the graves of great Christians and lying on them to “soak up the anointing.” I watched the video with a queasy feeling in my stomach. Not only is that person long gone (in this case, Smith Wigglesworth), their spirit in Eternity with God, but it was extremely disrespectful to the grave and there’s no instruction in the Bible towards this thoroughly odd practice. I shared the video with Carrie and this is what she said:

“I just can’t believe Bethel are doing this! I personally don’t have an issue with people engaging with the spirits of the departed; I’m a medium myself and also practice ancestor veneration. However, the Bible condemns mediumship so whether I agree with it or not isn’t the point. It’s whether the sacred text they’re claiming to live by allows it. And it doesn’t. 

Also, grave soaking (as they’re calling it) goes beyond common mediumship but probably lands on the more extreme end of the necromancy spectrum. I mean, they’re straight up trying to absorb a dead guy’s power. So for the sake of this discussion, say they were actually “soaking up his anointing” but what else were they soaking up? Smith Wigglesworth may have been a good person in their eyes but he wasn’t perfect because he was a human being.

Imagine this: Maybe he was like Mike Gugliumucci and had a secret pornography addiction. Maybe he was like Ted Haggard who had a homosexual affair with a sex worker (but just didn’t get caught). These are things that, in their eyes, would be considered immoral. So do they want to soak that energy too? 

Their flawed logic and cognitive dissonance (the occult is bad but it’s okay to practice necromancy for Jesus) leaves them open to soaking up EVERYTHING Smith Wigglesworth had operating inside of him and that, technically, wouldn’t be energetically safe.”

What does energetically safe mean? “Everything is energy,” says Carrie. “Not just in a woo-woo way but also from a scientific perspective. Conservation law within the science of physics states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. It’s ALWAYS converted from one thing to another. This is usually talked about within the context of applied force. E.g. My cheeky cat slides my mug across the bench then pushes it. The push is the applied force and through the power of gravity it falls to the floor and smashes to pieces. The applied force converts a whole cup that can contain liquid into fragments of glass all over the place. I could take that one step further and say, “Hmm. I liked that mug and don’t want to throw that out. I’m going to use the smaller pieces to create a pretty mosaic art piece.” Yes, I just compared Smith Wigglesworth to a mug. But hopefully that creates a clear illustration of what I’m trying to say.

I’d also like to point out, as a former Christian who is familiar with the Biblical perspectives and protocols around “the laying on of hands” that Charismatic and Pentecostal Christians generally have an understanding that they shouldn’t be touching just anyone. Because they don’t know what kind of “demons” or “spirits” a person might have. So even within Christian tradition there is an acknowledgement of the transfer of energy (or impartation). So it surprises me that these people at Bethel could do this when, within their own worldview, it is actually much more extreme than the laying on of hands.

As a side note, this whole grave soaking thing feels kind of idolatrous from a Christian perspective, right? Like isn’t God big enough to give them the same gifts that He gave the person lying in the grave? Not to mention that, separate from whatever religion or beliefs ANY of us have, isn’t it just bad taste to treat someone’s grave like a spiritual amusement park? Not as a witch, but as a person, that makes me feel icky.”

Why mention the different people’s and beliefs at the beginning of this article? Because threaded like a theme through-out the Bible is honour. Honour thy Father and thy Mother. Honour the Lord with your first-fruits. Honour. Honour. Honour. Yet grave soaking, to me,  smacks of dishonour. Imagine the family of the deceased seeing a video of elated Christians filming youtube videos on the grave of their granddad. But Carrie raises a good point: God is big enough to give you the same gifts without requiring you to go to a deceased and potentially dodgy second source.

But she had another cringy source ready to rock my world: Adolf Hitler was a grave soaker too. Eeesh. In a documentary called “In Search of History: Hitler and the Occult” the documentary makers allege that Hitler and the leaders of the SS were consumed with Aryan Mythology. They found people for the SS based on their ethnic purity going back generations. In order to ensure that the next generation of soldier were racially pure, they recommended sexual rites on the graves of Nordic/German heroes in order to conceive babies that would carry the spirit of the deceased warrior.

Wow.

Other Rituals 

Admittedly, and thankfully, grave soaking is not commonly practiced in Christian circles. (Thank God. Literally.) But as the influence of Bethel spreads, so too does the importance of knowing good doctrine from bad increase. In the last blog post, I put out a laundry list of other practices. So lets take a quick tour of the rest so this article doesn’t go forever.

First up: Extended periods of praying in tongues, warfare worship, prophetic declaration or strategic prayer. The Bible does clearly show the gift of tongues (on the day of Pentecost, and the Apostle Paul saying he prays in tongues more than all of us). It also advises that praying in tongues should be accompanied by the gift of interpretation. Thus, one needs to question what public and prolonged displays of praying in tongues actually achieves.

The same with extended “warfare” worship. My experience, and my reading of cult literature, raises one answer here (you might have others): It brings us to an altered state of consciousness.  Is this good or bad? Carrie reminds us time and time again that it is the intent that matters here. But she also mentioned this:

“It reminds me of the Benandanti of Italy. They took it upon themselves to go on a crusade in the spirit realm to “deal” with God’s enemies. Whether through prayer and discernment (as within the modern Christian Charismatic and Pentecostal traditions) or drug use (as with the Benandanti), these people put themselves into an altered state of consciousness in order to “perceive” spiritual truth about other people. Just as with the visions that were considered “evidence” during the witch trials, it’s not fair that a Pentecostal Christian’s “discernment” or a Benandanti’s drug-induced visions of God’s enemies should be considered any kind of proof of someone’s guilt. Especially if that alleged guilt leads to persecution and even punishment.”

In Carrie’s mind, and in mine, spiritual mapping is a 20thcentury witch hunt. “It sounds just like what they did with the Malleus Maleficarum beginning in the 1400s. Wagner’s methods of using prayer and discernment also remind me of how, back during the witch trials (in America and Europe), random people could say they had visions of people being witches and it would be considered “evidence” in a court of law. Lots of people were persecuted that way which is quite horrific.”

I love the, forgive me, dumb logic of some of the trials. You get thrown into a river with weights around your ankles to drown. If you drown, you aren’t a witch. If you don’t, and you manage to swim, you are a witch. It’s all semantics at this point. Either way, you are dead. Often the accused only had ‘discernment’ as the evidence against them. Yet discernment is what is used as evidence in a good many spiritual warfare practices.

Secondly, repressed memories or generational curses. Yes, the scripture does mention the “sins of the fathers” which could be called generational curses. But to put too much stock in this is to undervalue the complete work of the cross. Lets go back to John 19, people. It is finished. Its all finished. If you are saved, you are in Christ. You are a new Creation. The old things have passed away. A new thing has begun.

As for repressed memories, this represents a hugely concerning area for counselors and psychologists alike, as repressed memories may be false or heavily influenced by suggestion. I cite, for example, the satanic panic of the 90’s when many people were diagnosed with Dissociative Identity Disorder due to Satanic Ritual Abuse realised in repressed memories. Many, potentially the vast majority of them, were found to be false memories. Yet the damage these memories did was real. Real suffering came as a result.

As someone who knows what I believe to be a genuine survivor of Satanic Ritual Abuse, I’m horrified. Not just because fabricated memories devalue the suffering of genuine victims, but also because there is no reason for a person to carry a false memory and suffer the pain and disability it potentially brings. The mind is a powerful thing. Therefore, we should not mess with it. Pastors or Christian counsellors should, in my opinion, step very carefully and only with appropriate qualifications when it comes to counselling anyone. They can do great damage if they follow “discernment” as their guide. Repressed memories are just one area where good intentions and inadequate therapeutic qualifications and professional standards can damage a life incredibly.

Thirdly, and I’m hurrying: Vicarious repentance. Hey guys, the finished work of the cross is finished. There is therefore no need to repent for what others have done, regardless of whether or not you are related to them.

There might be need to make amends. But by and large, this is a civic thing (in my belief). I’m referring mainly to the generational effect of colonialism on first people. I.e. Kevin Rudd, when he was Prime Minister of Australia, issued an apology to our first nations for the stolen generation. It was symbolic, important, and it meant a lot to the recipients. It is not complete reparation, as there is still a lot of disadvantage in these people groups but that is a topic for another day and another expert as it’s a bit over my head to be honest. But on with the show…

Fourthly, Prayer journeys or locational rituals. Followers of the Spiritual Warfare Network and other practitioners have been known to go to specific locations to undertake their rituals. Not only is this not advised or commanded in scripture, its also expensive for no good reasons (plane tickets, yo) and is little more than super-spiritual tourism as its usually an extension of spiritual mapping which is highly subjective. Why? Because God is omnipresent and omnipotent. Praying to him here in the backblocks of Gippsland is as effective as praying to him at the wailing wall in Jerusalem. The important thing is the prayer, not the location.

Upon reflection, I’ve been involved in this sort of thing too. At the instruction of a prophet who visited my church many years ago,  we gathered our church members and the members of another church, went to every entry of our local down and drove a stake into the ground to declare the town to be the Lords. Nearly two decades on, that church still has the roughly same amount of people in it. Despite “reclaiming” the city, it remains largely unchanged except for the hard work of local law enforcement, council and community groups to make it a better place to live and work. But hey, they’d have done that anyway.

It makes me wonder how many towns have been “taken for Christ” in spiritual warfare rituals, and yet they remain, strangely, unconverted. This alone should make us question whether this type of spiritual warfare is pretty much a fruitless fig tree. We know what Jesus did with that.

Lastly, discerning, naming or renouncing demons and territorial spirits. Tune in next week for that one, kids.

I guess in conclusion, there are a good many similarities between what has been included in Christian Spiritual Warfare and the occult. But a personal area of conviction I felt when speaking with Carrie was this: she considers intent and energy a lot more carefully than many Christians I have experienced. We can be far too gung-ho, and plunge ourselves into a world that we so poorly understand.

There is a place for prayer. There is a place for the armour of God. There is a place for resting in the finished work of the Cross and standing firm in what our God has done for us. In my opinion, this is the light by which we should see all our spiritual activity.

*There are two articles left to be written in this series: “Territorial Spirits: Are they out there?” and “The Role of Prayer and Intercession in the Christian Life.”

Hey if you liked this, or had a morbid curiousity about it, sign up to the mailing list and like my socials!

Peace 
Kit K

Blurred Lines: Christian Spiritual Warfare Practices and the Occult

This is a blog series I’ve wanted to write for a while: one that examines whether the approach to spiritual warfare popularised by NAR and third wave charismatic movements actually reflects the way God wants us to approach the battle between good and evil. It’s taken me a year to do it because it’s confronting, even for me. It’s confronting because the place I found the reason for my internal disquiet was a conversation with a beautiful friend of mine.

An exvangelical witch – a person who has been on both sides.

Dear Christian friend, you have to read this.

 It turns out, in embracing what the big names in Christianity call “spiritual warfare” we may actually be performing rituals that are very similar to occult practices, but doing it in a less intentional, informed, or self-aware way than some of our occult counterparts. If that statement made your hackles rise, then strap on your seatbelt. We have some important ground to cover.

The Biblical Picture:

I’ll preface this by saying I believe in prayer. There is some personal ground I need to cover (and will blog on) when it comes to prayer and predestination. But for now what I do know is this: when the disciples asked Jesus how to pray, He gave them a good formula. He gave us “The Lords Prayer.”

It glorified God, focused on His will and His Kingdom. Asked for provision, forgiveness and help avoiding temptation. Then it came back to glorifying God. The end. But that’s not “spiritual warfare” per se.  That’s prayer.

There are three common references in the Bible that seem to combine prayer and warfare. The first is in Ephesians 6 where we are told to put on the whole armour of God. It tells us we don’t wrestle with flesh and blood but with principalities and powers. It then tells us to stand in truth and righteousness, to stand in peace, to use faith and salvation as our protection, and to use the Word of God as the sword of the spirit. It then tells us to pray. By and large, these “weapons” mentioned are weapons of peace, with the exception of the Word of God which can go both ways.

Why the lack of offensive weapons? I believe the answer lies solely and completely in John 19. It is finished. Jesus took the keys of death and Hell. He triumphed over sin and death. It was all done. Finito. That’s why later in Ephesians, the majority of the armour of God is simply standing in what has already been done and given, and using what God has already said. Nothing further is required.

Later in 2 Corinthians 10:4, we see another rationale for spiritual warfare: “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God for the pulling down of strongholds.” I do see how people have read this as a spiritual call to arms. However, the rest of the chapter goes on to explain these strongholds and lofty things are thoughts of the heart that exalt themselves against God. So basically, this is an internal work of sanctification to remove the enemies lies from our hearts and minds. It is not an exhortation towards Christians engaging in warfare against external demons. (I won’t talk about exorcisms and deliverance today. That area is too big and too troublesome!)

The Old Testament, being a different era, provides us with a slightly different picture, but in truth it’s not too different. While yes, the Kings and Judges in the Bible did take part in wars, the big stories show God, not mankind, intervening.

• The parting of the Red Sea as the Israelites fled Egypt.

• The walls of Jericho falling down without a single weapon used.

• God Himself destroying Sodom and Gomorrah, and flooding the Earth when wickedness had become so rife that only Noah and his family were found to be righteous.

• Even in the book of Daniel, which is the third reference to spiritual warfare when Daniel fasted for two weeks as he prayed for an answer, it was the angel that wrestled with the big demon. It wasn’t Daniel himself. Daniel was just skipping meals and devoting himself to prayer.

By and large, God’s methodology seems to be this: protect the ones who pray and obey, but don’t make them do the heavy lifting when it comes to fighting supernatural evil. In the New Testament era especially, Jesus has done the work and won the war. It’s a little different from what we see nowadays in spiritual warfare practice.

Spiritual Warfare, the Post-1990 Edition and the Occult Link: 

I know I’ve talked about C Peter Wagner a bit lately. He might be a nice guy and I’m sure he loves Jesus, but his theology has swept across the NAR and third wave movements and I have to say a lot of looks a little dicey when you weigh it up against the Word of God. In the 1990’s, C Peter Wagner began introducing a new type of spiritual warfare into Christian practice (at least it seems to be credited to him a lot, along with names like Cindy Jacobs, John Wimber and others. Wagner is just the most often quoted.).

This new approach has spread a lot in 30 odd years, and seeded many different approaches that don’t necessarily come from Wagner. There are many churches that don’t practice it (including my current church), but there are also many that do. It involves spiritual mapping, where participants pray until they feel God revealing the location of spiritual forces. Those forces are then opposed or warred against using various spiritual warfare ‘technologies.’ (These technologies are techniques, rather than gadgets that let you track down demons. Although, side-note, I’m told demon hunters and such gadgets do exist. The world is weird).

I’m not sure what Wagner wrote in his books about spiritual warfare technologies. But in my experience, and from a brief trip around the internet looking for what other people do, here’s a list of what may be called “spiritual warfare technologies.” Nearly all of them are things I have come across in one way or another during my own walk through evangelicalism. They include:

• Extended periods of praying in tongues, warfare worship, prophetic declaration or “strategic” prayer.

• Identifying (through subjective methods) repressed memories or generational curses.

• Discerning, naming, renouncing or addressing demons and territorial spirits.

• Vicarious repentance (i.e. repenting for the sins of previous generations).

• Prayer journeys in which participants go to specific places and use various methods to ‘displace’ demons found during spiritual mapping exercises.

• Burning CD’s, posters, t-shirts or any memorabilia that might be tangible links to demonic forces.

• Grave soaking where participants, largely of the Bethel ilk, lie on the graves of great Christians to soak up their anointing.

It’s not an exhaustive list. Spiritual Warfare practitioners may use any, all, some, or other techniques. Perhaps the most concerning thing about all of these “technologies” lies in the origin: They aren’t necessarily Biblical.  An article from Charisma Magazine on the topic of the Spiritual Warfare Network said, “Their insights on the subject of spiritual warfare were not derived solely through Bible study, but also through personal experiences of challenging the forces of darkness [1].”

This is extra-Biblical revelation at its finest. Yet scripture warned against adding to or taking away from the Word of God. This particular line of extra-biblical revelation has spawned a great many books, cost spiritual warfare travellers a lot of money, made a lot of money for the authors who make up the spiritual warfare network and cost a lot of time, money, effort and potentially distress for those involved. And for what? So that mankind can feel a sense of power over things that cannot be seen or controlled? Over things that Jesus has already taken care of? But that’s just where it gets interesting. My witch friend Carrie Maya summed it up in this statement:

“Speaking from the basis of my own personal practice (I’m certainly not representative of everyone in the occult community), witchcraft is about power. It’s about learning how to wield power over my own mind, home, words, the kind of energy I bring to my relationships, and—ultimately—taking control over the direction of my life using intention, ritual, and entering into altered states of consciousness. I’m mostly a solitary practitioner. But there’s something to be said for a good community experience. My favourite: magic as a collective response to oppression.

Marginalised groups have done this for generations in and attempt to take their power back. There are many traditions where oppressed People of Colour have been dispossessed and stripped of our entire cultures (which, of course includes the our spiritual systems)—often resulting in classic symptoms of colonial regimes. Systemic abuse like slavery, poverty, high mortality and incarceration rates, discrimination and prejudice in the job market, etc. are just a few of the ways that People of Colour been made impotent.

Many slaves throughout history have cursed their colonisers. Many women throughout history have cursed  the men who have forced them to live in an inequitable world. I never felt comfortable with hexing but it’s still a concept I’m sifting through. At the same time I don’t judge anyone who’s felt they’ve needed to do it.

As someone who was a Christian far longer than I’ve been a witch, I honestly feel that Christianity (along with other religions) are inherently magical—even if that’s’ not how their adherents would describe their faith and practices (occult literally just means concealed and hidden). I look back at experiences I had in the Pentecostal church; when we had to scream at demons, dance for hours to go into battle with the Satanic forces that held our town captive, and pray in tongues until our throats hurt. In hindsight, it was like one big witchcraft cult!

The definition that most occultists (from Wiccans to Theistic Satanists) use for magic is “manifesting your intent”. What this means is to set your mind on a desired outcome and then bring that desired outcome to pass. For some people, that outcome might be to summon a demon. For others, it might be to lose weight. And for others still, it might be simply to have a daily meditation practice where the outcome is greater peace.”

Carries statement makes an interesting juxtaposition against the Lords Prayer: “Thy Kingdom come. Thy will be done.”

Carrie remarks, “There is a difference between spellcraft and prayer. Prayer is a beseeching. It’s calling upon a force that you, essentially, see as more powerful than you are in some way, shape, or form. For a traditional Christian, that force is one or all aspects of the Trinity. For me, this includes praying to my Higher Self (the self that is connected to the collective consciousness of all beings on the planet), my ancestors, my spirit guides, and the god/goddess archetypes that I don’t necessarily see as real but use as tools in my own personal healing. And I definitely see the need for beseeching. I’m all for it. This is what I have in common with Christianity.

Where that commonality ends, though, is when spellcraft comes into it. Because while I certainly beseech my Higher Powers for blessings, comfort, strength, etc. I don’t pray “Thy will be done”. I pray for clarity to see what it is I truly believe is best for me. But my ultimate intention is “My will be done”.  

Carrie went on to describe instances she had heard of when Christians had “felt lead to curse” certain businesses and remarked that “That person was obviously trying to justify what they were saying by putting God’s name at the beginning of that statement. But whether God, Satan, or Queen RuPaul herself told you to curse someone, a curse is still a curse. A hex by any other name would smell just as hexy.”

It should make us stop and think. It should make us scrutinize our motives and methods, and it should absolutely make us reconsider the power of words and intent.

I wrote about the Christian pursuit of power in my series on dominionism (linked below). But here is the big flag and the great caution:

Before you even think about entering the minefield of spiritual warfare, you need to make sure that you are not entering based on extra-biblical revelation that could actually be false or misleading doctrine and not the will of God. And you better make sure you don’t have a shred of self-motivation. Otherwise, my friend, what is it that you are really doing?

Towards the end of my time in evangelicalism, I grew to question the correlation between the spiritual warfare practices I was engaged in and the Bible’s instruction towards us. The words “It is finished” echoed in my head over and over while I played keyboard as the backing track for my church’s spiritual warfare experiences. If it was finished, if we weren’t to worry about what we ate or drank or what tomorrow held, if Jesus took back the keys of death and Hell, then what were we yelling about? Psalm 23 echoed in my head. Surely obedience and devotion to God was our best protection, no matter what life threw at us? (And look, life has thrown me a bit of stuff, to be honest.)

In the end, it started to look a lot more like mankind needing to feel a sense of power. That’s why Carries statement, “Witchcraft is about power,” was confronting as heck to me. Today, I am working on making friends with powerlessness. Over some things, I will have power to act or react, or to intervene in some way. But in other areas, I’m coming back to Proverbs 3:5 and putting my trust in God to take care of the rest. After all, it is finished. He’s done it all.

A good many preachers have, over the years, criticized the slow infiltration of the church by humanism. Yet on their watch, it looks like we have been infiltrated by occultism too. Ironic, given it wasn’t so long ago that the church was hunting down witches and killing them in the name of the cross. Such an unjust incongruence it is when we inadvertently copy their methods.

Hey friend, if you read this, hate it, and decide I’m completely wrong, that’s cool. We all get to choose our belief system and bear responsibility for the eternal consequences of it. But the key message as always is this – know what you are up to, and know what you believe.

That’s part one, guys and gals. I hope you’ll tune in next week when I interview Carrie on the occult practices she sees in the modern version of Christian spiritual warfare. If you’ve ever been part of a burning party, where you destroy worldly memorabilia, you’ll want to read this one.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

“The Devils, Demons & Spiritual Warfare,” in Charisma, February 1994, p. 52-57, as cited by Dave Hunt, Occult Invasion, Harvest House Publishers, 1998, p. 514

https://www.thebereancall.org/content/does-bible-teach-spiritual-mapping

https://www.lausanne.org/content/territorial-spirits

https://cicministry.org/commentary/issue109.htm

https://kitkennedy.com/2019/04/11/what-is-the-nar/ 

https://kitkennedy.com/2019/04/24/riding-the-third-wave-the-neo-charismatic-movement/

https://kitkennedy.com/2018/11/29/what-is-dominionism/

https://kitkennedy.com/2018/12/05/whats-the-biblical-basis-of-dominionism-is-there-one/

https://kitkennedy.com/2018/12/20/dominionism-and-politics-in-the-era-of-trump-and-scomo/

https://kitkennedy.com/2019/01/09/why-im-not-a-dominionist-anymore/

Why I’m Not a Dominionist Anymore

When I sat down to write this series, I knew I had to write a personal reflection because a helicopter view of the dominionism issue pales in comparison to the personal experience of it. Still, the first versions of this blog piece had too many elements. Too many other peoples stories. So I’m stripping it back and having a go at writing my experience of dominionism. 

An experience I found crushing.

From the time I was 15, I studied a book called ‘In His Steps’ as part of a discipleship program I was in. The plot of this book involved the editor of a local paper who started to run it the way he believed Jesus would have – censoring certain ads, posting good news and omitting other stories – that sort of thing. That book began a movement that spawned millions of plastic bracelets that asked ‘WWJD? (What would Jesus do?).’ It had its upsides, sure. The very question should call us to a higher level of ethics, compassion and altruism. Right?

For my church, it began our slide into dominion theology. We just didn’t give it that name. I don’t know that we gave it a name at all.

I was 15 when I was introduced to the idea of taking over positions of influence for the cause of Christ. I was 30 when I started consciously questioning it. I was 32 before I gave it words, asking my husband in the quietness of our loungeroom whether the end justified the means. Here I am, 35, no longer going to a Dominionist church, and finally talking about it. And perhaps not a moment too soon.

It’s an interesting thing to reflect on. As a 15 year old who wanted to serve God to the best of her ability, I was a sponge. I soaked up all the teaching. However, in comparing notes with my husband, I realise that I always had reservations. But I felt strongly that if I did not participate, it would mean trouble for me somehow. I also knew that questioning authority was not the done thing in my church. It was dishonouring or rebellious and these things were snuffed out pretty hard.  All my friends and family were in boots and all. If I wanted to be part of their lives, I had to be too. So I became a reluctant participant in the Dominionists efforts of my church.

It’s interesting – how you can justify some things to yourself when your entire life is wrapped up in it, when you know how difficult things will be for you if you raise your hand and say “Umm, I’ve got questions.” I certainly silenced my misgivings for a long time.

I absolutely know that not everyones experience will be like this. I’m only talking about mine. Even my husband’s was slightly different. He moved from our state’s capital to be part of this ‘rare true church.‘ If there was Coolaid to drink, he skulled it. Over time, the rose coloured glasses would shatter for him too. But the happy memories he looks back on from that time are not mine to share.

For years, the church (which my husband and I have moved on from) was involved in an international network with heavy Dominionist overtones. Catch cries like “What time is it? Its time to take over!”, “Dominion in every domain” and “Let’s go take the city” were met with songs about laying down our own ambition to serve the cause. We talked this. We sang this. We worked this.

Over time, I became aware that working out my salvation had become hard work – a fact that seemed at odds with Ephesians 2:8-9 “Salvation is by grace through faith and not of works, lest any man should boast” and 2 Corinthians 12:9 which talks about God’s grace being sufficient. I was hearing less and less of these scriptures, instead hearing constant reminders of how we must carry out our primary assignment or risk Gods grace being removed from our lives.

I now realise that second bit is unbiblical, and the truth I need to align myself with is that Gods love is the same no matter what. It would not change if I never attended church. It would not change if I was an utter failure at everything I attempted. Gods grace and His love never fails.

But my entire church,  family and social community was so caught up in this movement that I dared not question it. My husbands natural interest in politics got swept into this, and the results of it were deeply uncomfortable for us at times. My natural desire to write, and write fiction, got swept into this. All of a sudden the hobby I’d taken up as a means of carving out some me-time in my crazy life was my ‘primary assignment.’ I was to conquer the mountain of arts and entertainment.

To me, it was more pressure, where I had only taken it up to escape the pressure that existed around me. Life had become relentless hard work. Salvation had become a curse. My only hope was a short life. But after four pregnancy losses, a fifth pregnancy finally survived beyond the seven week mark and I had to start asking what kind of life I wanted for my child. By virtue of this, I started asking what kind of a life my heavenly Father wanted for me.

That pondering turned out to be revelatory.

The Fruit of Dominionism

At the time I wrote my first novel, I was running a business, working full-time and serving on my  church’s music and leadership teams. This meant that with meetings, bookwork, practices, Sunday services, and so on, I barely had time to myself. The business was a “kingdom” business I had entered with many misgivings. It turned out to be seven very difficult years. But it was in service of “taking the mountain of business and commerce.” I was working as a subcontractor in the education space, not just turning up to a job but trying to do my bit to ‘take the mountain’ of education. I was giving 120% in every aspect of my life and my adrenal system didn’t love this. I fell into exhaustion, constant migraines, and my battle with post-traumatic stress disorder became a complicated one to win.

When every action or inaction has eternal consequences, you can’t just take a sick day, can you? In fact, there are many things that fall by the wayside.

The wheels started to come off subconsciously as I started to look around and see exhausted people. A number of my friends were suffering with depression and anxiety. I myself was battling crippling fatigue. Many a lunch break was spent asleep, even asleep in my car if I was working out of town. But I brushed it off. It was too hard to think about.

Then I started writing my third novel. It was supposed to paint a picture of what it looked like when “the kingdom of God” was manifest on Earth – i.e. when Dominionism finally reached its peak and Christians had taken over everything. I didn’t like anything I could see in my minds eye as I listened to message after message searching for hints. So I looked to the Bible and found my answer in Romans 14:7 “For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost.”

My Dominionist experience had been governed by a driving mandate to gain power and influence in order to bring the kingdom of God (ie. righteousness). But it had come at the expense of peace and joy. If life as a Christian was a three-legged stool – it was crazy wonky, having only one leg to hold it up.

After watching a documentary the lights came on. I didn’t want to live this life. I didn’t even want to write about it, because I didn’t like what I saw in my minds eye when dominionists took over. I was a fiction writer. I could create utopia if I wanted. But the clashes were too deep even for fiction.

Losing Dominionism

Between October and November 2015, my husband and I quietly lost dominionism. If you know our personal story, you will also know we lost a lot more than just a bit of bad theology. But I won’t cover all of that here.

When we lost Dominionism, we also lost a sense of destiny and significance. To be honest, it was a painful loss. We had been told our family and church had national significance. Having entered this movement as youths, when we were idealistic and wanted to change the world, it had been a seductive belief, and there’s a risk our identity had been somehow built around it.

People ask me why someone would get involved in Dominionism. My answer is two-fold: 1) they may not realise they are, as this doctrine seduces you by degrees. 2) It is indeed seductive. If you are a Dominionist, you are not a normal person slugging it out in your job. You are destined for greatness. You have God on your side. You are, in a way, super human. You are destined to take over.

Destined.

I see it now as a grandiosity, and inflated sense of self. But the point of Christianity is Galatians 2:20 – Christ living in and through us. There’s no greater example of humility and servitude than Christ.

Still, losing that grandiosity was painful. Imagine going from the Christian version of Sidney Bristow on Alias – superspy with a super destiny masquerading as a run of the mill office worker – to being an average Joe asking ‘What is the meaning of life?’

It took three years to get to where I am now. It took a lot of pain, a lot of tears, and a lot of sleepless nights. But where I am is happy, at peace with my faith, still grappling with my grief but happy. My three legged stool isn’t wonky any more because it isn’t just righteousness trying to hold the whole thing up. Peace and Joy are there too.

The Question of Powerlessness

Unsurprisingly, my husband and I have spent many a late night up talking about why we have gone on the journey we have. When it comes to Dominionism at least, I have a theory. Or rather a hypothesis, because obviously it is unproven (can you tell I work as a research writer?)

My theory is that another seductive thing about Dominionism is that it shields us from our own powerlessness.

The church used to be a fearsome and powerful institution. It was the measuring stick against which society sized itself up. To swear on the Bible was deep and meaningful. To sin was mortally wounding. The church lead the charge with social justice, with serving widows and orphans and trying to make the world a better place.

Somewhere along the line we lost that higher ground. The secular world now exhibits a greater dedication to social justice, and often finds the church as the thing that opposes it. Government hums along without needing the churches permission or looking to it for guidance in most instances.

Dominionism, to me, seems to have its roots in fear not love. If we fear losing our rights, fear losing our relevance, then Dominionism is the antidote. It tells us we are destined to forcibly retake the ground we have lost. That God demands it of us.

Yet the higher law we are supposed to live under is the law of love. Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and strength, and love your neighbour as yourself. Love-based faith, not fear-based activism.

Right now, at this point in my life, I do not live in fear of my powerlessness. I don’t, because my faith is in God who is all-powerful. I do not fear losing my rights. Because if I lose my rights, then I share in Christ’s sufferings, which according to my Bible means I’ll also share in His glory. I don’t need his glory. I am comfortable with not sharing his sufferings. But if I do, that’s ok.

It would be a light on the hill moment. It would be an opportunity to share a little light in a dark world. That would be ok.

I hear the persecution narrative from dominionists. But I don’t view Western Christians as persecuted. I’m happy to give that crown to our Middle Eastern brothers and sisters. There are places where the crown of persecution can be rightly worn.

It is not in a representative democracy where the worst persecution a Christian is likely to face is a deletable comment or an angry emoji reaction on Facebook.

It’s blunt. But it’s true.

I may have lost a lot, but losing Dominionism isn’t a thing I grieve. Three years on, I’m seeing purpose in my life again and I’m enjoying life that once again has peace and joy. I do believe that God has a plan for all of us. But I don’t think there’s anything grandiose in that. There is beauty in it for sure, though. And that is more than enough.

If you missed the rest of this series, then here’s the rest: 

What is Dominionism? 
Is there a Biblical basis for Dominionism?
Dominionism and politics in the era of Trump and ScoMo

Is There a Biblical Basis for Dominionism?

As a research writer, I never show my hand as far as my personal belief or individual take on a topic is concerned. I simply state the facts, spit out a list of references and tie it all together in a neat little narrative. So it was a little out of character for me to show my hand so clearly in the last article, titled “What is Dominionism?” I am anti-Dominionism, a conviction I hold so strongly that I came out and said it, right off the bat. I’ll talk about the personal reflections that lead to that standpoint in another article. Today, I’m talking about the Biblical reasoning.

Depending on the context, I either laugh or groan internally when I hear people say, “Well I believe the Bible!” Frankly, it’s a complicated book! You can’t just believe the Bible. You need to consider which lens you are viewing it through (and it is inevitable that you will be viewing it through a particular philosophical or theological lens, even if you don’t know it). Are you a Biblical literalist? A Calvinist? A progressive? Are you attempting to view it through the lens of Christ Himself? Or perhaps through the eyes of a preacher you follow? It’s a complicated question. Someone with a decent grounding in theology could argue for or against a good many doctrines regardless on the basis of scripture.

Call me a poor theologian if you like, and I will happily wear that, but I just can’t argue for Dominionism from scripture. Add to that one simple fact: Dominionism comes from Biblical Reconstructionism – the brain child of Rushdoony (and other influencers for sure), who was also a totalitarian. So its kind of counterintuitive to argue for dominionism, and against Kim Jong Un. Just saying. But anyway. On with the show.

Is there a scriptural basis for Dominionism?

For the hard-line devotees of Dominionist theology, there are a few scriptures that seemingly justify it. Even for those who find themselves in tacit agreement with dominionism, these scriptures seem like justification on first look. I would argue, however, that they don’t actually back the militant Dominionist approach. The key scriptures often used to argue for Dominionism are the following:

Genesis 1:26 “Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves on earth.”

Luke 19:13 “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return. He called his ten servants and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, “Occupy till I come.”

Matthew 28:18-20 “Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

And finally, Matthew 16: 15-20. “He said to them, But who do you say that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood has not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to you, That you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Okay! So lets talk about it.

Genesis 1:26 seems like it should be the first place we argue for Dominionism. It’s also the first place we should argue against it. I really can’t say it better than this [3]:

“This verse is taken by Christian Dominionists as a divine mandate to claim dominion over the earth, physically, spiritually and politically. However, this is taking a large step away from the text, which only says to have dominion over the creatures of earth, and to “subdue” the earth. It is likely that this verse simply means for humanity to a) multiply and expand over the face of the earth instead of staying in one place and b) keep and take care of all other living things.”

Pure and simply, and perhaps most tellingly, there were no political, business, media or education entities in Genesis 1. This passage of scripture specifically names plants and animals. It makes no mention of any spiritual or political dominion.

It is my belief that Genesis 1:26 was talking about spreading out over the earth and taming creation, not about taking dominion over or subduing people. When we think our job is to subdue people, we have problems. Subduing people means taking away their rights and ignoring their hardship – these are two things that the God we see (especially in the New Testament) would never sanction.

As responsible Christians, we need to read the Bible in context and consider the kind of God who created us. Why would He grant us free will (two trees in the garden) only to take it away in the next breath by instituting a system that subdues and disenfranchises some people groups by granting power to others? Dominionism involves Christians ascending the halls of power, but at the cost of what? As they say so often in The Handmaids Tale (seemingly a cautionary tale when it comes to theocratic dystopias), “Better isn’t better for everyone.”

Then we move on to Luke 19:13 – “Occupy till I come.” In other translations, it simply says “Do business until I return.”It was a parable spoken by Jesus describing good stewardship, illustrating that a good steward doesn’t just look after what is entrusted to them, they improve upon it.

I agree with this premise. I just don’t think it’s about dominionism. This passage is not militant. It is not forceful. It does not allege that these stewards should engage in covert activities in order to carry out their master’s mandate. In these ways, it does not resemble dominionism at all. In fact, if anything, it resembles servanthood.

If you look at this scripture through an economic lens, it makes sense. If a master is gone ten years, then the ten pounds buried in the ground has lost value, as it does not keep up with inflation. Its an illustration that bears thinking about: whatever we don’t improve upon is given to entropy. You could look at this scripture and see it as a picture of the church – Jesus was going, and would return at an unknown point in the future. If we stayed the way we were, never sharing the good news of Christ with others, then Christianity and the gift of salvation would have died out with the 12 disciples and the other followers of Christ during his time on Earth. “Do business until I come” could mean “keep this movement going. Pass on my teachings. Keep growing.”

How on Earth it has come to mean taking dominion over politics, business, education, arts, etc. is beyond me. Can we reflect for a moment? Even Jesus didn’t do this during his time on Earth. His chosen nation, the one He was born into, wasn’t the ruling class of the day. It was not the powerful Roman empire. It was the nation of Israel.

Perhaps this scripture ties most closely to the Great Commission of Matthew 28. Yes, Jesus charged us with being stewards of this message, and making sure all heard it and had the opportunity to be saved. This is a beautiful thing, when done right. But again, it is a message of love, of forgiveness, and of Jesus sacrifice. It is not political. It is not business related. It is not militant.

I can’t ignore the fact that many a country was colonised with Matthew 28 in the minds of the explorers of the olden days. Many a nations first people still bear the scars of colonisation. Again, I don’t know how the Great Commission could translate into the atrocities committed during those times. I can’t even bring myself to mention them in this post, because their damage is so great. How would Jesus feel about it? To know that the sacrifice of His life for the redemption of mankind somehow meant the subjugation and abuse of people He meant for us to love and care for.

It’s a topic too large and too complicated for me. Even this month, a Christian was killed while trying to reach an unreached tribe. I do agree that the Great Commission charges us with making sure all have an opportunity to respond to the message of Christ. I don’t agree that it should be done in ways that are unethical, or that abuse, or remove rights. That, to me, is in direct opposition to what Jesus was about.

Often, I see Dominionist theology’s adherants taking their so-called mandate to be a command to vocally oppose ideologies they do not agree with. I’m sure in the future, I’ll blog on this too. But for now, this: can we learn the lessons of the harm done via imperialism and colonialism, and avoid committing the spiritual equivalent by forcing our righteousness down the throats of people whose rights we intend to take away? Can we reflect instead on John 3:16 and realise there are no caveats? That God loved all of us to the point where He sent His Son to die for us?

Anyway….

Now finally, Matthew 16. There are lots of times through-out scripture where the term “dominion” is used. But overwhelmingly, these are referring to God having dominion. In Matthew 16, Jesus mentions the ‘the keys to the kingdom’ in a conversation with Peter. This, to many, symbolises dominion over a fallen Earth returning to mankind. But my big thought here is this: Jesus said to Peter that “on this rock” He would build His church. The rock was Jesus or the revelation of who Jesus was/is. Ownership of the church still belonged to Jesus, never to Peter. The keys to the Kingdom described governance of the church, which, in all messianic prophecy throughout scripture, rested on Jesus shoulders. Not on that of man. For me, it’s a bit of a long bow to think that Peter replaces hundreds of years of messianic prophecy with that one statement, especially given the general acceptance that ‘the rock’ was the revelation of who Christ is/was.

There is another rabbit hole I’m choosing not to go down, and that is the Zion scriptures. The reason I am choosing not to explore them is twofold 1) because the above four scriptures are more commonly used as justification for Dominionism, and 2) because it seems quite clear from Scripture that Zion is referring to either Jerusalem, or to the City of God. Perhaps I’ll talk about that another day, but I’ll do so with a guest blog from a dear friend who is also Jewish! (Just doing my bit to avoid cultural appropriation here!)

The Ultimate Example

Now let’s look at Jesus’s MO, seen best in Philippians 2:5-11.  “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

It’s clear here that Jesus brought himself low. He did not ascend to the halls of power and redeem the Jews from the seat occupied by Pontias Pilate and his homies. It was redemption via the most humiliating of deaths. In this passage of scripture we see a clear exhortation toward humility and servanthood, and a clear statement that the highest office still belongs to Jesus not man. Why claim to emulate Jesus then pursue a faith that orbits around Dominionism? It’s counter-intuitive. Jesus had a whole world of people He could have come to during the years He walked the earth. He chose not to come to the powerful Roman empire. He chose to come to a small nation, a marginalised race within a powerful Roman stranglehold. Again, He didn’t seek power.

So there are a few fundamental clashes there but the big one for me is Philippians 2:5-11. This is a picture of Christ as servant, not as Dominionist. This is a picture of going low to serve and empower, rather than going high to take what one deserves. He was perfect. He deserved/deserves everything. Instead he gave everything. If we are to emulate anything, then the servitude and compassion of Christ is surely the place we need to start and end. That compassion and servitude is shown over and over again…from Joseph, to Daniel, to Jesus himself. It is what I believe Christianity should be built around.

There is one more picture that I can never ignore, and it’s the picture of Christ the shepherd leaving the 99 sheep to find the one lost sheep. To me, it’s a picture of care, and of seeing the plight of the individual. Yet if we seek after power, then we can so easily ignore the plight of the individual while we try to chase down dominion in the domain that surrounds the 99.

I get the appeal of dominionism. It means we do not have to confront our own vulnerability, because we believe we are born to rule. We do not have to trust in God, because we believe that God has put His trust in us. It means that call of compassion is lesser than the pull of power.

So in light of all this, I have to agree with the scholars that call dominionism a heresy – that is a false doctrine, an unbiblical idea that has seeped its way into popularity in the church. It does not mean that Christians should not have positions of influence in any of the domains of society. If we are to live and work in this society, be good at what we do, or be good stewards of the teachings of Christ, then it is inevitable that some of us will have positions of influence. In fact, we should try to excel! We should try to serve and empower the very best we can!

But power in and of itself should never be the motivation. Because that is a position loaded with potential to go awry, and it is not an example Jesus ever set for us.

So that’s that! Tune in next week when I talk about Dominionism in modern politics in Australia and America.

The Prosperity Gospel - Truth or Convenience?

When I started this blog, I started with a list of must-write topics as long as my arm. But when it came to actually writing any of them, the big question became "Which one first?" I had two options: procrastinate forever or rip the bandaid off. I'm choosing the latter, and I'm starting with something that popped up in my Facebook feed: Benny Hinn saying he was guilty of taking the prosperity message outside the realms of what was actually Biblical. 

Before we get too far in, check out the video. You can see it here, and the comments start around the 9 minute mark.

For those new here, what is the prosperity gospel? Wikipedia, the font of all well-researched knowledge (heh, heh), says it's this:

"Prosperity theology (sometimes referred to as the prosperity gospel, the health and wealth gospel, or the gospel of success)[A] is a religious belief among some Christians, who hold that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for them, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one's material wealth. Prosperity theology views the Bible as a contract between God and humans: if humans have faith in God, he will deliver security and prosperity.

The doctrine emphasizes the importance of personal empowerment, proposing that it is God's will for his people to be happy. It is based on interpretations of the Bible that are mainstream in Judaism (with respect to the Hebrew Bible),[1] though less so in Christianity. The atonement (reconciliation with God) is interpreted to include the alleviation of sickness and poverty, which are viewed as curses to be broken by faith. This is believed to be achieved through donations of money, visualization, and positive confession."

Okay, so where do we start here? First of all, I'd like to say I don't think prosperity is wrong. Joshua 1:8 talks about having good success. Some translations of Jeremiah 29:11 say "I know the plans I have for you. Plans to prosper you..." Enter "prosper" or "prosperity" into your search function on your Bible app and you'll come up with all sorts of fun.

But does faith in God mean oodles of money? Does His will for us mean ease in every area as the prosperity gospel indicates? Heck no. Exhibit A: Job. Almost the entire book of Job! The examples cited by Benny Hinn were Jesus and Elijah. Did they walk in abundance, flashing around the best chariots of their day? Nope. Were they outside the will of God? Well, Jesus was God. And Elijah, though he had his moments, was pretty ok! They had no lack. This is what Hinn now believes the truth of prosperity in accordance with the Bible to be.

If prosperity theology was it and a bit, then I reckon Jesus would have chosen something a little more palatial than the side of a hill in the middle of nowhere for the loaves and fishes thing. And he probably could have catered the event properly rather than having to scrounge at the last minute. I'm being overly flippant here, but you get my drift. His was a modest lifestyle.

I read a quote on the Internet the other day. It was someone quoting the message they'd listened to that Sunday. It said "Scarcity is a myth."

I face-palmed pretty hard. Partially because I studied economics and anyone who has knows that scarcity is the cornerstone economic theory is built on - Human wants will always exceed the resources available to fulfill those wants. Partially because the Bible is full of scarcity - famines and such. Yes,God looked after His people but some went without for a time. Their faith didn't erase scarcity.

The other thing that saddened me was this: even in an age of good literacy, we still don't read our Bible enough to know when something is a little bit off. Does it matter if something is only a little bit off? Well yes. If we build our lives on things that are only a little bit off, and those things lead to other things, we can end up facing the wrong direction entirely.

But thats a diversion. I did want to point out that, originally, reading the Bible was reserved for those scribes and teachers who had the ability to do so. We do these days! The majority of us (in the Western world at least) can read! We can access free apps so we don't even need to buy a Bible! It is so readily available. So why aren't we educating ourselves on what it actually says.

It doesn't say scarcity is a myth. It doesn't say we will all be rolling in cash because we love Jesus. It says we will have no lack, that we ought not worry about our needs. He has that all in hand (Matthew 6).

It also warns against greed (1 Timothy 6:10-11, Hebrews 13:5 and Luke 12:15), and it is this that the prosperity gospel is in danger of glossing over. Is success ungodly? Heck no. Are riches? Absolutely not. But are we failing as Christians if the budget is a bit thin? No, no, no.

Are we failing in our faith if we don't get the healing we are praying for? Also, nope. One of the greatest Christian women I've ever known died of cancer. It was a shock to all who were steadfastly believing for her healing. But was she failing in her faith? Absolutely not. I'm my eyes, she was a Hebrews 11:13 person who received her promise after having passed on.

I would hate to be one of those preachers who misleads people by touting this money gospel. Because right there in my Bible is a line about the love of money being the root of all evil (Matthew 6:24).

There was a comment in the video that Benny Hinn made me cringe and then think - "Wow! True." He said that there are many Christians out there who aren't actually Christians, whose Christianity has become deluded.

Wow. Ouch. Wow again. But goodness he is right. This is the danger when we don't become students of our faith. Even Hinn said he had listened to those around him, but as he grew and read the Bible more and more, his Christianity became more balanced.

I've often wondered when I see an ocean of people worshipping at mega-churches, how many of them read their Bible enough to know if a doctrine preached from that stage is on the mark or not? How many of them get swept up in the emotion of the moment, the swell of the crowd, the electricity in the air and let that become the guidepost of their faith instead of the red letters that should be our guidepost. Every preacher is human. Every preacher can have an off day, or even an off doctrine if they aren't surrounded by good counsel that picks up on every little thing. To err is human. But the safeguard is the word of God, and knowing it.

I'm not saying I haven't ever been guilty of following blindly, or of getting swept up in the moment. Eh. Who hasn't? All I'm saying is we need to be students of our faith so we know when something isn't quite right. The prosperity gospel, in my opinion is one of those not quite right things. The Bible shows us that our Heavenly father will look after our needs (Matthew 6:31-33). It says His plans are for our good.

It doesn't say it will all be easy. It doesn't say we will never face hardship. It doesn't guarantee private jets and palatial homes (The book of Job, Hebrews 11:13).

If riches is what God has in store for you. Awesome! I'm thrilled for you. But as Hinn challenges in the video, don't let those riches become the centre point. Jesus needs to hold that territory all for Himself.

Just some thoughts hey! I've never been a big Hinn follower. But I've got to stop and applaud the guy for saying "Hey I got it wrong here." That's big.

Over and out

Kit K