Mark Bubeck And Spiritual Warfare

person from demonic oppression. He will collect these casestudies and then draw conclusions about what we are to dowhen we encounter a demon.Even when the Bible is consulted with this process no matter how high the empiricist’sview of Scripture, in practice theBible is treated as just anothervoice or witness to demonicactivity. This always results inadjusting the biblical teachingon demons until it fits with theconclusions of various experiences.’’8The idea of demons as an internalenemy in believers cannot be foundin the works of Reformers, Puritansor the historic mainstream and doesnot square with the Scriptures.Bubeck and his ilk would have usthink that the Reformers, the greatpast leaders of Church history andthe inspired writers of the Biblemissed something.Bubeck has developed a paranoidand simplistic view of some areas oflife. This perspective often lays theblame for certain emotions and sinpatterns in a believer on the doorstep of demons who can enter andcontrol the Christian’s life. Bubeckrejects the idea that a believer canbe ‘‘possessed’’9 but says the enemycan gain ground in a believer and adirect control in internal areas (otherthan the spirit). This is what requiresdeliverance.10Bubeck gives the followinginstructions when confronting ademon in the life of a worldlybeliever:‘‘Do demand that if the wickedpower has divided into severalparts, that he become a wholespirit. Do be prepared for thewicked power to try to hurt theperson you are working with insome manner. Sudden bodypains, a severe headache, achoking experience, and thelike, are very often used. Command the power, naming theJuly-September 1996symptom, to release this holdimmediately in the name of theLord Jesus Christ.’’11In a long list of problems thatBubeck says could be attributed todemons,12 he fails to note that thesealso could be attributed to a medical etiology, to sleep loss or sleepdeficit, to sins and habit patterns ora number of other things.Bubeck’s Information SourceFor proof of demonic control ofChristians and ancestral bondage,Bubeck refers to other ‘‘experts’’ inthe field, teachers who agree withhim. David Powlison, in one of thekindest treatments of this movementone will ever find, refers to the truesource of the ancestral demonsteaching:‘‘The notion of ancestral spirits isa bit of occult theology read intothe Bible, not out of it.’’13In his book, The Rise of FallenAngels, Bubeck cites Moody Professor C. Fred Dickason,14 who says hegot some of his information fromdemon contacts (in Christians) whotold him the truth about their lies.15Bubeck also appeals to C. PeterWagner.16 Wagner is an extremefringe Charismatic who has claimedhe has the gift of ‘‘leg lengthening.’’17 Some years ago Wagnercalled together a conference atFuller Seminary to bind the demonof homelessness, the demon of sickness (which apparently did notwork), and the demon of the Bermuda Triangle.18 He also promotesthe theories of Costa Rican occultpsychologist Rita Cabezas, who promulgates the idea of territorial demons who rule geographical areasand must be discerned and prayedaway.19Another of Bubeck’s experts isJames Friesen,20 who claims to havefound demons lodged in people’snecks and shoulders, something hegot from ‘‘a flash of an idea.’’21 Healso believes in ancestral demons.22This constant citing of expertscreates, in Richard Ofshe’s words,‘‘a belief that relies not on evidencebut on the constant quoting andreferencing of others who hold thesame belief.’’23Diminishing Christ’s WorkD.L. Moody said:‘‘Someone has said there is always a devil at our right hand:though if we resist the devil hewill flee from us. But it isdifferent with the flesh; the fleshcleaves to us. I believe that theflesh is the worst enemy wehave.’’24David Wells explains how thekind of ideas and teachings such asBubeck’s, empty the cross of itsaccomplishment:‘‘Oscar Cullmann has noted theuncommonly large number ofNew Testament passages inwhich Christ is spoken of asbeing at God’s ‘right hand’ .These passages testify to thepowerful rule that he is nowexercising in heaven and onearth. Paul admonishes his readers about Satan’s strategies inEphesians 6:10-20 only after hehas told them that by virtue ofthe cross and resurrection, Christis already ‘far above all rule andauthority and power and dominion, and above every name thatis named, not only in this agebut also in that which is tocome’ . That is to say that thewarfare with demonic powers isnot still awaiting some ultimateresolution: it has been won already, and Christians have entered into the victory throughtheir union with Christ. WhenPaul comes to deal with spiritualwarfare in Ephesians 6:10-20, hecounsels believers simply to‘withstand’ and ‘stand,’ drawingon the weapons of Christiancharacter, the Word, andprayer.’’25As one reads The Adversary,The Quarterly Journal—15

Bubeck appears almost Shamanistic.In a renunciation prayer he suggeststhe following words advising that allChristians should pray it out loudnot knowing what works of Satanhave been passed on from ourancestry:‘‘I here and now renounce andrepudiate all the sins of ‘sblood ancestors. . I cancel outall demonic working that wouldwant to be passed on tofrom his blood ancestors.’’26This undercuts the whole doctrineof redemption from the past (1 Peter1).Ancestral BondageThe notion that a Christian cansuffer demonic influence because ofthe sins of an ancestor has circulated for a number of years andBubeck has picked it up along withother errors. His explanation:‘‘The Word of God hints thatwhen demonic powers get theirhooks into a person’s life, aproblem of a transfer to succeeding generations is created. Thesefallen angels can control a human person only as long as thatperson lives. When he dies, thedemonic powers continue tolive. Seeking to continue theirmission for Satan, they look tothe most direct claim for theirnext work: this seems to be thedeceased person’s children,grandchildren, nieces and nephews. Thus demonization becomes a generational problem.’’27Thomas Ice addresses these errorsafter examining Exodus 20:5:‘‘It seems clear from the passagethat the basis of God’s judgmentor blessings are based upon thechoice of each successive generation’s decision to follow afterthe sins of their ancestors. Thus,the mode of transmission of thesins is not because the childrenare under a curse from sincommitted by the parent. In16—The Quarterly Journalstead, the sin is conveyedthrough the child learning thesin patterns from his parents andchoosing generation after generation to persist in them. A mystical or curse transmission is nottaught or implied from the text!Ezekiel 18:2-20 says that Godcurses each Israelite individualfor his own sins and not specifically because of something thattheir fathers have done . In factthere is not one example in theentire Bible of a saved personbeing under a satanic curse,which had to be ‘broken’ byChristian exorcism or distinctconfession.’’28Possession vs. InvasionIn The Adversary, Bubeck positsthat a believer cannot be possessedin the same sense as an unbeliever.This unbiblical nuance is also heldby Dickason and others. However,the mind and emotions are subjectto invasion and control. Bubeck andothers would call it ‘‘givingground.’’ The control is real, pervasive and determinative, according toBubeck and an exorcistic type ofrenunciation prayer is the only wayout. He explains it this way:‘‘This is like opening the door ofyour life and letting in the thiefwho is going to rob and hurtyou have a place in your life .Satan’s worker will try to getmore helpers to move in, andthey will begin to try to dictateto you in certain given areashow you will feel, think or act.They will even try to increasetheir areas of hold through moredeceiving and more lessening ofyour own will to the substitutionof theirs. . They will be soclever as to make it almostimpossible to separate your ownmind, will and emotions fromtheirs.’’29Most commentators would seegiving Satan ground as giving Satanan advantage. Ephesians 4:27 says,‘‘give no place to the devil.’’‘‘Place’’ is recognized as a metaphorfor opportunity as the contextshows. When we speak lies andspeak harshly to others, we giveSatan a foothold by promoting hiskingdom and agenda rather thanGod’s. There is nothing in thecontext about indwelling demons.Bubeck’s ideas contradict suchBible verses as 1 John 1:9 and Psalm51, which tell believers to confessand forsake our sin, not look fordemon scapegoats. It circumventsthe admonition of Hebrews 12 tostruggle with and overcome besetting sins and continue to run withperseverance. Our bodies aretemples of the Holy Spirit. Demonscannot occupy God’s temple.While James 4:7 tells us to resistthe devil, exorcisms and renunciation prayers are not mentioned.James says we are to humble ourselves under the hand of God,repent, change, stop befriending theworld and acting like the unsaved.We are to resist, that is, stand forGod. Bubeck’s ideas destroy responsibility and the truth of lifelongstruggle as found in the eighthchapter of Romans. Galatians commands us to put off the works of theflesh and put on the fruit of theSpirit.Bubeck’s ‘‘Findings’’Bubeck’s writings give the pictureof someone who knows more thanthe writers of Scripture, though heprobably does not intend to conveythat idea. In The Adversary, hediscovered or uncovered a ‘‘snarling, cruel, crude, vulgar demon thathad taken the same name as thisyoung man’s last name.’’30 No biblical text or evidence is sighted.In a long passage on communication (Ephesians 4:22-32) Paul dealswith sins of speech. Vulgarity is tobe stopped and we are to replace itwith speech that builds others up.Perhaps all that is too easy or toonormal. Paul nowhere hints of having conversations and confrontaJuly-September 1996

tions with ‘‘vulgar demons.’’Bubeck continues this tack withhis interpretation of his 11-year-olddaughter’s stomach and colon problems.31 His concern right away wasdemons. After repeated ritualisticprayers and in accordance with hisexpectations he discovered andbound the demons ‘‘Nausea,’’ ‘‘Colon,’’ ‘‘Destroyer’’ and ‘‘Deceiver’’as well as ‘‘no-name’’ demons. Afterlong nights and many renunciationprayers, protracted binding of various demons, his daughter was‘‘cured.’’Most Christians would be troubledto learn that what Bubeck is proposing is akin to Unification Churchdoctrine. In The Divine Principle,the Rev. Sun Myung Moon teachesthat believers are subject to Satan’sinvasions.32Even the Assembly of God denomination issued a position paperin 1972 that would refute the extremes of modern day ‘‘bondagebreakers.’’ They hold the biblicalposition that demons are never aninternal foe for the saved.There is a universe of difference inour approach to the Christian lifewhen we begin to see demonicinfluence as internal and determinative as opposed to external andresistible. James 1 makes it clearthat the internal foe is always ourown sin nature. It also seems veryclear that Satanic attack is always anexternal influence for the Christian.The onslaughts are real and difficultbut external.Christian Research Institute writersBrent Grimsley and Elliot Miller,saw this clearly showing that pastoral care hangs on this issue.33If interior lusts are what draw usaway, then Satan can appeal externally to the foe within. That, webelieve, is the biblical perspective.There is nothing in Scripture thatwould persuade us that demons canJuly-September 1996come into the body and the interiorrealm of a Christian in any way. Ifour sin patterns are bound to ourold nature all the hocus pocus ofexorcistic rituals, renunciationprayers and acting out a script willnot offset a continued lifelongstruggle and prayerful watching.Bubeck’s view appeals to our quickfix, microwave generation.Eric Sauer saw this truth clearly inthe athletic figures of Scripture:‘‘The race looks forward to theheavenly goal . Boxing pointsto our opposition to the enemyin us. . I buffet my body, andbring it into bondage . Wrestling refers to our fight with thepowers of darkness around andbeneath us. . these three comparisons, in spite of their greatsimilarity, nevertheless picturethree different directions of ourChristian warfare.’’34Sauer is quick to point out that thepowers of darkness are ‘‘around andbeneath.’’ Satan and demons areclearly shown in the Bible as theinfernal and external enemy whilethe flesh is the internal doubleagent.As Thomas Ice wrote, all theshenanigans of binding demons, rebuking the devil, inherited cursesare all a ‘‘false mysticism.’’35The True Path from BondageThe biblical route for the growingChristian is not an excursion intothe realm of the demonic, or a mistyancestral history, but what the Puritans used to call ‘‘all-around godliness.’’ This simply meant the weekin and week-out continuance in allthe means of grace: daily prayer,Bible reading, church attendance,regular confession of sin, resistingtemptation, fellowship, persistentwell-doing, cutting off temptationand obeying Scripture. These are theweapons of true Christian warfare(Ephesians 6, Hebrews 10-12).Doing all the above will free usfrom having to rely on magicalwords and mystical phrases or demon busters and deliverance shamans. Spiritual warfare is fundamentally ethical, moral and behavioralwarfare. That basically is the reallydeep but hard way.The big question that Bubeck andthose like him have to answer isthis: If Scripture gives us doctrineand instruction in righteousness andall we need to be ‘‘complete, thoroughly equipped for every goodwork’’ (2 Timothy 3:16), why is ittotally silent regarding the things thedeliverance teachers say are so crucial. If it is not in the Word of Godwhere is it coming from?The devil is only a tempter. He iscalled that (Luke 4:2). The realorigin of evil is our own hearts(James 1:14-16). All the combustiblematter is already in us. Satan anddemons can only appeal to that inthe believer. Let’s not fight imaginary battles, that though sensationalin the short run (and good for booksales), have no lasting benefit in thelong run. Exorcisms are a detourfrom the real world of struggle andgrowth.Bubeck’s new doctrines will onlydivide churches and confuse believers. In the end Satan will have wonbecause discerning Christians remained quiet on this vital issue.Bubeck’s approach as far as depravity, the sin nature, addictionsand the mastery and depth of sin(even in a believer) is shallow anddeficient. Far more biblical, sensible, and productive are two worksfrom Gary Shogren and EdwardWelch, Addictive Behavior andRunning in Circles — How to FindFreedom from Addictive Behavior.The first volume is designed forpastors and counselors, while thesecond serves as a workbook for athe one being counseled. These arehard hitting, scriptural and practicalworks.The Quarterly Journal—17

The words of Thomas Ice andRobert Dean are a fitting conclusionand warning in regard to the demons in Christians teaching:‘‘We are calling on the body ofChrist to reject the proliferatingsuperstitions in Christendom.These beliefs are the products ofhuman thoughts and experiences, but cannot be verifiedfrom the Bible. Possibly the factthat so many people have recently been converted out of theoccult explains why spiritualwarfare in many circles is increasingly resembling a ‘tit-fortat’ battle between two sorcerers. But the Bible says that ourminds are to be renewed byGod’s Word itself, and not bythe Word of God as interpretedfrom a non-Christian framework,especially a framework whichhas much in common with theoccult.’’36Endnotes:1. See the accompanying article, ‘‘The Curseof Curse Theology — The Return of RebeccaBrown, M.D.,’’ found in this Journal.2. See for example Reclaiming SpiritualGround by Jim Logan, Moody Press.3. Mark Bubeck, The Adversary, pg. 129.4. Good News Broadcaster, Nov. 1983, pp.26-28.5. Donald Grey Barnhouse, The Invisible War,pg. 166.6. See further, ‘‘The Diversion of Deliverance,’’ PFO Newsletter, Vol. 5, No. 3,July-Sept. 1985, pg. 2.7. The Adversary, op. cit., pg. 121.8. Thomas Ice and Robert Dean Jr., A HolyRebellion, pg. 30. This book is now availableunder the title, Overrun by Demons.9. The Adversary, op. cit., pg. 88.10. Ibid., pp. 90-92.11. Ibid., pg. 125.12. Ibid., pp. 144-146.13. David Powlison, Power Encounters, pg.46. Emphasis in original.14. Mark Bubeck, The Rise of Fallen Angels,pg. 59.15. C. Fred Dickason, Demon Possession andthe Christian, pg. 210. For a critique ofDickason and his work, see The QuarterlyJournal, Vol. 8, No. 2, April-June, 1988, pp.2, 9-10.16. The Rise of Fallen Angels, op. cit.17. C. Peter Wagner, How to Have a HealingMinistry in Any Church, pp. 53-54.Editorials(continues from page 2)Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie acknowledgesthis teaching in Mormon Doctrine. Under the heading,‘‘Only Begotten Son,’’ he writes:‘‘Beloved Son, Christ, Son, Son of God, Christ isthe Only Begotten . the Only Begotten Son . theOnly Begotten of the Father . These name-titlesall signify that our Lord is the only Son of theFather in the flesh. Each of the words is to beunderstood literally. Only means only; Begottenmeans begotten; and Son means son. Christ wasbegotten by an Immortal Father in the same waythat mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers’’(pp. 546-547, italics in original).Under the heading, ‘‘Son of God,’’ in the samebook, he writes:‘‘God the Father is a perfected, glorified, holyMan, an immortal Personage. And Christ was borninto the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being;he was born in the same personal, real, and literalsense that any mortal son is born to a mortalfather. There is nothing figurative about his18—The Quarterly Journal18. Michael Horton, editor, Power Religion,pg. 64.19. See further, Mike Taylor, Do DemonsRule Your Town, Chapter 9.20. The Rise of Fallen Angels, op. cit., pg. 25.21. James Friesen, Uncovering the Mystery ofMPD, pg. 231.22. Ibid., pg. 257.23. Richard Ofshe, Making Monsters, pp.202-203.24. W.H. Daniels, editor, Moody: His Words,Work, and Workers, pg. 389.25. David Wells, God in the Wasteland, pp.180-181.26. The Adversary, op. cit., pg. 149.27. The Rise of Fallen Angels, op. cit., pg.45.28. Biblical Perspectives, Vol. 5, No. 2,March-April 1992, ‘‘An Examination of FalseSpiritual Warfare Cliches,’’ pg. 5.29. The Adversary, op. cit., pg. 89.30. Ibid., pg. 95.31. Ibid., pp. 117-122.32. The Divine Principle, pg. 148.33. Brent Grimsley and Elliot Miller, Christian Research Journal, Summer 1993, ‘‘Can aChristian Be Demonized?’’, pp. 16-19, 37-38.34. Eric Sauer, In the Arena of Faith, pp.51-52.35. Biblical Perspectives, op. cit., pg. 6.36. A Holy Rebellion, op. cit., pg. 194.gpaternity; he was begotten, conceived and born inthe normal and natural course of events, for he isthe Son of God, and that designation means whatit says’’ (pg. 742).When this writer has confronted Latter-day Saintswith these statements, he repeatedly has been told,‘‘That’s just his opinion!’’There seems to be little hesitation by Mormons todistance themselves from awkward areas of theologyproclaimed by their church leaders. Yet one of theLDS church’s tactics to buttress its claim as the onlytrue church is an appeal to the Bible.A small cardstock handout used by Mormons is saidto contain the ‘‘Seventeen Points of the True Church.’’This circular says its author consulted the Bible toidentify the characteristics of the first-century ChristianChurch, thereby allowing him to discover which is theone true Church upon the Earth today. The circulargoes on to say that he found 17 distinctive characteristics of this true church, all of which the LDS churchpossesses. Some of them were: a restored church, afoundation of apostles and prophets, the teaching thatGod (the Father) and Jesus Christ (the Son) havebodies of flesh and bone, and the practice of baptismJuly-September 1996

or prayer ritual which shows it was Peter’s sin nature responding to con-fusion brought externally by Satan. While it must be said that some of VOL. 16, NO. 3 JULY-SEPTEMBER1996 EDITOR: KEITH A. MORSE Mark Bubec