Talk:Spiritual warfare

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity
Christianity Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Charismatic Christianity. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments


This kind of stuff doesn't belong in an article that's supposed to have a neutral point of view:

Spiritual Warfare Spiritual Warfare is something we all unknowingly deal with daily. As stated in the article, authors have captured this in novels. Frank Peretti and Shaunti Feldhahn are perfect examples. Their books deal with spiritual warfare. They are able to show us, through fiction, how real this is. The angelic and demonic creatures are not seen or heard, but sometimes felt. Spiritual warfare is not only fiction. In Ephesians, Paul tells us how real spiritual warfare is. Ephesians 6:11-17 tells us to "Put on the full armor of God so that you can take you stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around you waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with you feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God (NIV). In these verses, Paul tells us that Christians will battle against rulers and authoritities headed by Satan. To withstand their attacks, we must depend on God's strength and use every piece of his armor. Paul is not only giving this counsel to the church, the body of Christ, but to all individuals within the church. The whole body needs to be armed. As you do battle against "the powers of the dark world," fight in the strength of the church, whose power comes from the Holy Spirit (Life Application Study Bible 1997, 2141). Works Cited Life Application Study Bible. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. and Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1997.

Systemzwang 01:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

You're absolutely correct that this information is very slanted. However, there is much in there, and in the portion that you deleted without moving to the Talk page, that gives insight to the topic, including the biblical source material, and the references to C Peter Wagner. He has done much to renew interest in the topic among evangelicals outside pentecostal/charismatic circles.--Gandalf2000 19:35, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

But To writes articles on Spiritual Warfare without ever makes reference to bible and to peter wagner is similar to writes on Neoi-conservatism,without any mentions to George Bush or to Leo Strauss. (unsigned comment by User:Eliecer guillen 29 December 2005)

Please feel free to return content, including the Deleted Content below, back into the article with a neutral tone.--Gandalf2000 15:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Deleted content; add back in with WP:NPOV

The apostle Paul says:

For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ. 2 Corinthians 10:3-5 NIV

In Ephesians 6:10-20, he describes the spiritual armor, introducing it as follows:

Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Ephesians 6:11-13 NIV

Some Christians approach this issue incorrectly, either placing too much emphasis on it, or adding extra-Biblical teachings and practices.

Many adherents of the Word-Faith Movement as well as many in certain renewal and revival movements are, for various reasons, enamored with the concept of spiritual warfare. Inspired by - and often using the terminology of - Frank Perretti's fiction, legends like King Arthur's Roundtable, and movies such as Braveheart, they "rebuke demons," "bind Satan," and "take control of cities and situations."

Charles Peter Wagner, head of Global Harvest Ministries in Colorado Springs, Colo., is in the vanguard of the movement. He defines three levels of spiritual warfare: "Ground-level" involves casting demons out of individuals; "occult-level warfare" involves more organized "powers of darkness" [They target here New Age thought, Tibetan Buddhism, Freemasonry, etc.]; and "strategic-level warfare" directly "confronts 'territorial spirits' assigned by Satan to coordinate activities over a geographical area." Targeting cities with 'spiritual mapping,' prayer Christian Science Monitor, Sep. 23, 1999

I don't see how any of this could be considered NPOV. If this is a citation rather than your POV, then it might be usable in the article, but you'd need to cite the source.
Septegram 19:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] not yet there

I still think that it's not NPOV.

Some Christians approach this issue incorrectly, either placing too much emphasis on it, or adding extra-Biblical teachings and practices.

Is it an NPOV opinion that extra-Biblical teachings and practices are an incorrect approach? Systemzwang 04:23, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sourcing

We need verifiable sourcing for everything here. This article is weak without it. - CobaltBlueTony 14:27, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spiritual Warfare without Peter Wagner

The problem here is you delete in your editions to Peter Wagner,the MAIN author on it. Re-writes the article making reference to him.

Can you explain specifically what the problem is? I think there's a bit of a language barrier here ... BigDT 23:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
The problem is: your editions no gives any place to Peter Wagner. You must to makes reference to him. Him created Spiritual Warfare as theological concept. Classical Daemonology as referenced in the article,is related but no identical to SW,and acording to many writers even are oposite concepts. You must to makes mention to Kurt Koch,Don Richardson and Liberation Theology also. BIG DT How if I send my articles to your e-mail,you edit it and publish here?. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.210.203.44 (talk • contribs)
Honestly, I have a little bit of a problem believing that someone born in 1930 invented spiritual warfare. That aside ... if you want to make a change to the article, you can. I would suggest discussing changes here or even posting the text here for review first. That way, we can correct grammar and spelling. The problem before is that you completely replaced the text of this article with a new one that you had created and the whole thing almost got deleted as a result. BigDT 00:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

While the quote from Peter C. Wagner is thought provoking and adds further consideration to the topic, the rest of the article should not be deleted in its presentation. It should be added into the existing article, if it is going to be included at all. Joe Webster 21:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reliance on Bill Ellis

Bill Ellis, referred to in the original article, is currently "an associate professor of English at the Hazleton campus of Pennsylvania State University". An apparent academic admirer of his clearly says in this otherwise benevolent article: "Bill has never been part of the mainstream of folklore scholarship. His work has always been quirky." Ellis describes himself as “a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America” and, moreover, someone “who has taken leadership positions and on occasion taught adult Sunday school and led services (Raising the Devil pxii).”

When contacted, however, the ELCA stated that they had no knowledge of Bill Ellis and “cannot confirm whether he is a member of the ELCA or one of the other Lutheran bodies.” Ellis is also a member of the International Society for Contemporary Legend Research which spends a lot of its time exploring the occult and explaining away supernaturalism, often relegating it to the quagmire of exploded superstition, urban legend and folkore.

For the “Evangelical Lutheran” Ellis, exorcism is “a means of temporarily inducing an alternative personality … beneficial to some persons for whom conventional psychological or psychiatric therapy fails (Raising the Devil p282).”

For traditionalist Old Catholic Bishop Seán Manchester, against whom aspersions from Ellis are aplenty (Raising the Devil p238), exorcism is the act of casting out demons (Mark 16: 17). It is not alternative therapy for failed psychology. Bishop Manchester has specialised for much of his life in the ministry of exorcism, opposing satanic cults and their rising influence, and is today the presiding bishop of the British Old Catholic Church. A recommendation of his work in this ministry may be found in the Reverend Kevin Logan’s Satanism and the Occult (Kingsway, 1994, p163). He has also contributed to television and radio programmes, including many documentaries, for in excess of three and a half decades, and is still consulted for television documentary projects concerned with supernaturalism, demonolatry and the occult. The target of Ellis’ pen is himself the author of several books that cover these topics. When writing Raising the Devil and the article on which the chapter was based regarding the exorcism of predatory demons by Bishop Manchester, Ellis placed significantly more reliance on a UK necromancer and occultist who had been convicted of desecration and vandalism (whom Ellis interviewed in 1992) than he did on the word of a "fellow" Christian (whom Ellis never met but with whom he eventually entered into a brief correspondence in which he attempted to make amends and play down his reliance on a convicted felon who dabbled in black magic).

British Old Catholic Church 27 July 2006

[edit] Armor of God reference

Presently, this article says the armor of God is a reference to the Roman armor. But Paul, being the Bible scholar that he was, was probably borrowing from Isaiah 59:17 which predated the Roman Empire. Joe Webster 00:12, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

A request was made for original research. This reference was added because it was an earlier reference to a "helmet of salvation" and a "breastplate of righteousnes."
We know that Saul of Tarsus, later known as Paul, sat under Gamaliel, per Acts 22:3. It is more likely than not that he was acquainted with this passage in Isaiah, and his phrasing in his epistle to the Ephesians makes a stronger connection to this passage rather than just an offhanded allusion to contemporary armaments. I am not sure what further proof is required. Joe Webster 16:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
A request was not made for original research. Rather, I placed that tag as a warning that a part of the article may violate the Wikipedia:No original research policy. The phrase Paul, being the Bible scholar that he was, was probably borrowing from Isaiah... uses the word "probably" which indicates conjecture. It's fine to report conjecture if it comes from a verifiable source, but as an unsourced sentence it constitutes an opinion of whoever inserted that sentence in the article. Removing the word "probably" would remove the conjectural tone, but still would require a citation to a verifiable source. -Amatulic 19:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this revision better? Joe Webster 06:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, much. I wasn't familiar enough with the subject to make any edits myself. I will add that this looks like a difficult subject to make approachable to readers from non-Christian cultures. While it is well-written, I can't shake the feeling that this article's editors assume the reader already has a Christian point of view. Keep up the good work; it looks much better now than a version from a long time ago which read like a sermon. -Amatulic 21:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)