Spiritual Warfare, Pentecostals, and sInterventionist eology

In a broad sense, as Kimberly Marshall and Andreana Prichard note, “Spiritual warfare is a collection of rituals, practices and discourses that aim to do battle with (typically) invisible supernatural threats.”7 In the non-Western world, irrespective of religious afliation, such beliefs of supernatural threats are part of the social imaginary and are undergirded by an ontological orientation that “the supernatural is indissolubly connected with the natural.”8 Hence it is normal to assume that “nefarious non-human actors [are] able to ‘intervene’ in the afairs of humans.”9 Consequently, when individuals face impediments such as fnancial loss, sickness, and strained relationships, they are understood to have been caused by a cosmic disharmony understood as an attack by the spirits.10 The reasons for spiritual disturbances could vary from human encroachment into the spirit’s territories to a strategic attack from a neighboring village spirit. Consequently, traditional healers or spiritual specialists are consulted to perform propitiatory sacrifcial rites and ceremonies to appease spirits and reclaim harmony.11 In such a spirit-interfered reality, although the phrase “spiritual warfare” is generally referred to as a Christian theme, the concept is very familiar to other religious adherents worldwide.

7 Kimberly Jenkins, Marshall, and Andreana Prichard, “Spiritual Warfare in Circulation.” Religions 11, no 7 (2020), 2.

8 Mircea, Eliade, “The Sacredness of Nature and Cosmic Religion” in An Anthology of Living Religions, edited by Mary Pat Fisher and Lee W. Bailey, 2nd ed. (New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2008), 7.

9 Marshall and Prichard 2020, 2.

10 Although “spirits” are interpreted diferently by diferent people groups and religions, I am using “spirits” here in a general sense to emphasize exclusively the disturbances often manifested as a result of “spirit” attacks.

11 Lalsangkima, Pachuau, Indian and Christian: Historical Accounts of Christianity and Theological Refections in India (Delhi: ISPCK, 2019), 133.

Even though traditionally such an understanding of spiritual reality was considered as part of the “excluded middle” reality in the Western world,12 with the rise of Pentecostal Christianity globally, there has been a framing of the Pentecostal imaginary to see “the world as a space that contains many unfamiliar territories”13 that are infuenced by invisible demonic forces that Pentecostals claim to be able to uncover. Notwithstanding the gulf of cultural diferences between countries in the global South and North along with the diversity within global Pentecostalism, as Birgit Meyer notes, “Pentecostals share a view of the world as the site of a spiritual war between demonic forces and God.”14 Consequently, the Pentecostal emphasis has been to discern and “see” the operations of the demonic, which may well be found operating in a person’s body or public spaces or institutions. Such a common theme among Pentecostals globally to see the demonic and the warfare against it led some scholars to characterize spiritual warfare as “Pentecostal universalism.”15

However, in parts of the global South, Pentecostal Christianity, with such a unique way of seeing the world, was able to do what western missionary Christianity could not, that is, to demonstrate how belief in Jesus Christ can keep people safe from the evil spirits and meet their everyday needs. In other words, the “interventionist theology,” as AsomoahGyadu puts it, of Pentecostal Christianity afrms the “spiritual middle” worldview prominent in the non-western world and shows people how Jesus Christ can deliver and protect them by defeating evil powers.16

12 Paul G. Hiebert, “The Flaw of the Excluded Middle.” Missiology 10, no 1 (1982).

13 Birgit Meyer, “Pentecostalism and Globalization,” in Studying Global Pentecostalism: Theories and Methods, edited by Allan Anderson, Michael Bergunder, Andre Droogers and Cornelis Van Der Laan. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2010), 117.

14 Meyer, 117.

15 Knut Rio, Michelle MacCarthy and Ruy Blanes. “Introduction,” in Pentecostalism and Witchcraft: Spiritual Warfare in Africa and Melanesia, edited by Michelle MacCarthy, Ruy Llera Blanes, and Knut Mikjel Rio. (Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017), 7.

On the one hand, in the context where people believe that malevolent spirits impact their lives, Pentecostal soteriology is presented as participating in the divine life through the flling of the Holy Spirit, “the most benevolent Spirit.”17 Such a Spiritcentered salvation message enables people to experience Jesus Christ as an exorcist,18 victor,19 and healer.20 On the other hand, in the context of the global South, where daily struggles of poverty and inequality are prominent,21 such a Pentecostal soteriology also leads to envisioning the “materiality of salvation,” where the Gospel is not only for the transformation of the inner human being but also for “bodily human existence.”22 This interventionist approach of Pentecostal soteriology experiences the Holy Spirit as the benevolent Spirit (as opposed to malevolent spirits) and embraces the Gospel for the solution of their material needs and is evident among charismatics /Pentecostals globally—in parts of Asia,23 Africa,24 and Latin America.25 In this way, as Alan Anderson notes, “Salvation (sometimes called ‘full salvation’) is an all-embracing term,”26 encompassing the forgiveness of sin, deliverance from evil powers, healing from sickness, earthly blessings, and eternal rescue from damnation.

16 J. Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu, “Mission to ‘Set the Captives Free’: Healing, Deliverance, and Generational Curses in Ghanaian Pentecostalism,” International Review of Mission 93, no 370–71 (2004), 392.

17 Lalsangkima Pachuau, “Primal Spirituality as the Substructure of Christian Spirituality: The Case of Mizo Christianity in India,” Journal of African Christian Thought, 11 no. 2 (2008), 9–14.

18 Abraham, Shaibu.“Jesus the Exorcist: The Emerging Pentecostal Christology in India,” in Pentecostalism: Polyphonic Discourse, edited by Rajeevan Mathew Thomas and Josfn Raj, (Kerala: New Life Bible Seminary, 2019), 123-148.

19 Pachuau 2019, 146 & Pachuau 2008.

20 Simon Chan, Grassroots Asian Theology: Thinking the Faith from the Ground Up (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2014), 108–110.

21 Pachuau 2019, 114.

22 Miroslav Volf, “Materiality of Salvation: An Investigation in the Soteriologies of Liberation and Pentecostal Theologies,” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 26 no. 3 (1989), 448.

More notably, such spiritual intervention has been efective due to the Pentecostal cosmology of seeing the world through a spiritual warfare framework. Themes such as overcoming, conquering, or defeating evil powers became familiar in Pentecostal and charismatic Christianity.27 For the grassroots believer who lives in the spiritual reality of spirits and spiritual rites, such a spiritual warfare framework enables them to envision God’s immanent presence,28 defeating the evil spirits and providing healing and material blessings. Such emphasis on healing and deliverance within the spiritual warfare framework has undoubtedly led to believers’ empowerment and spiritual liberation.29 Even though Pentecostals in the global South and North approach their faith through a diferent cultural lens, the themes of God’s immanent presence in the form of Spirit baptisms and manifestations and the consequent spiritual liberation has been common across the global community of Pentecostals.30

23 Shaibu Abraham, “Holy Spirit in Pentecostal Mission Praxis in India: A Paradigm for Mission in Pluralistic Context,” in The Holy Spirit and Christian Mission in a Pluralistic Context, edited by Roji T. George (Bangalore: Saiacs Press, 2017), 84–104.

24 J. Kwabena Asamoah-Gyadu, “Pulling down Strongholds: Evangelism, Principalities and Powers and the African Pentecostal Imagination.” International Review of Mission 96, (2007), 306–17.

25 Wilma Wells Davies, The Embattled but Empowered Community: Comparing Understandings of Spiritual Power in Argentine Popular and Pentecostal Cosmologies, (Netherlands: Brill Publishers, 2010); René Holvast, Spiritual Mapping in the United States and Argentina, 1989–2005: A Geography of Fear, (Netherlands: Brill Publishers, 2008).

26 Alan Anderson, An Introduction to Pentecostalism: Global Charismatic Christianity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 228.

27 Asomoah-Gyadu, 306.

28 Shaibu Abraham, Pentecostal Spirituality: A Paradigm of Liberation (New Delhi, Christian World Imprints, 2020), 28–30.

29 Chan, 103.

However, spiritual liberation has not always translated to a Pentecostal public witness, advocating for the socially oppressed and economically poor. Although for some, their spiritual liberation motivated them to break away from oppressive patterns of behavior and achieve an upward socioeconomic movement,31 social liberation has not been a Pentecostal priority. To that extent, Pentecostal public social engagements throughout history32 have taken “an incremental approach to social change by addressing the human needs that confront them on a daily basis”33 than a more political advocacy approach to “directly challenge the existing sociopolitical order.”34

30 As Cheryl Bridges Johns writes, “In places such as African and Brazil there is greater fusion of God with the phenomological; while in the West, Pentecostal believers tend toward a more dichotomized world-view between the natural and supernatural. Yet, in spite of the distinctions there is a unique world-view that is Pentecostal. This view may be characterized as seeing God at work in all of life, the revelation of God unfolding in human history.” (Cheryl Bridges Johns, “Prayer, Evangelization and Spiritual Warfare: A Pentecostal Perspective,” in Pentecostal Ecclesiology, edited by Chris Green (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 237.

31 Miller, Donald E., and Tetsunao Yamamori. Global Pentecostalism: The New Face of Christian Social Engagement. (California: University of California Press, 2007) 160-183.

32 Satyavrata, Ivan. “Power to the Poor: the Pentecostal Tradition of Social Engagement.” Paper presented at the WAPTE Consultation: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, August 2013. https://wapte.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/IvanSatyavrata-Power-to-the-Poor.pdf ; Duncan, Kent. “Emerging Engagement: The Growing Social Conscience of Pentecostalism,” Encounter: Journal for Pentecostal Ministry 7 (2010). Accessed online on March 33, 2022. https://legacy.agts.edu/ encounter/articles/2010summer/duncan.htm#_edn22

33 Miller and Yamamori 2010, 216.

34 Chan 2014, 40.

At the same time, recently Pentecostals and charismatics have been making news for their public (political) presence (as indicated in the introduction); such engagement has been with the overtone of taking “dominion” over the worldly realm.35 While such a dominionist attitude could fnd its theological premise in Genesis 1:27, it is also strongly infuenced by “Kingdom Now” theology36 and the strategic-level spiritual warfare (SLSW) framework, giving rise to a kind of public witness that polarizes and at times demonizes non-Christians. Therefore, as I seek to propose a theoretical framework of spiritual warfare conducive for a public witness that considers the common good, it is frst essential to critically analyze the SLSW framework and explore its limitations to social and public engagement.

In the 1980s, Pentecostal interventionist theology and dominionist public theology received vital inspiration from the American charismatic movement in the form of strategiclevel spiritual warfare as part of the third wave of Pentecostal renewal.37

35 Cox, Harvey Gallagher. Fire From Heaven: The Rise of Pentecostal Spirituality and the Reshaping of Religion in the Twenty-frst Century, (Cambridge, M.A.: Da Capo Press, 1995), 289.

36 For Pentecostals in America, Kingdom Now theological teaching came as a replacement to the earlier Pentecostal teaching of Latter Rain revival that held frmly that “Jesus would return soon” in their lifetime. As Harvey Cox notes, “It is true that the Latter Rain preachers did not advocate political action. They believed the spiritual purifcation and renewal of the church itself would accomplish the transformation of the world. In any case the Latter Rain revival did not last long, perhaps a decade, but it laid the theological groundwork for what has now become the Kingdom Now movement with its passionate activism and its intention to reestablish civil society along biblically mandated lines.” Cox , 294.

37 Wonsuk Ma, “In Jesus’ Name! Power Encounter from an Asian Pentecostal Perspective,” in Principalities and Powers: Refections in the Asian Context. (Manila:

For third wavers, there are various levels of spiritual warfares based on the nature of Satanic infuence. In personal matters, ground-level spiritual warfare is warranted. Furthermore, while occult-level spiritual warfare deals with other religions, strategic-level spiritual warfare (SLSW) deals with the “territorial spirits” that are assigned to geographical territories and social institutions.38 Although Pentecostals and charismatics use all three levels of warfare interchangeably in their practice, the third level, strategic-level spiritual warfare, received widespread attention in the global south, especially when it comes to matters in the public sphere.

Third wavers believe that territorial spirits are assigned to “keep large numbers of humans . . . in spiritual captivity. Results of this oppression include but are not limited to rampant injustice, oppression, misery, hunger, disease, natural disasters, racism, human trafcking, economic greed, wars, and the like.”39 Subsequently, combat with these territorial spirits is essential. Along with intercessions, authoritative prayers, prayer walks, prophetic decrees, and power encounters, “spiritual mapping” was introduced as a warfare method.40 Spiritual mapping is seen as spirit-led research to identify the local historical and geographical factors that feed into the land’s oppressive spiritual condition. More importantly, spiritual mapping aids one to engage in more targeted prayer combat against specifc Satanic territorial spirits. Such is the strategic approach to spiritual warfare put forth by the third-wave Pentecostals.

OMF Literature, 2007), 29; Wonsuk Ma, “A ‘First Waver’ Looks at the ‘Third Wave’: A Pentecostal Refection on Charles Kraft’s Power Encounter Terminology.” Pneuma 19 no 2 (1997). The term third wave is used as it claimed to be a “further evolution of the two earlier Pentecostal/charismatic movements: classical Pentecostalism (the ‘First Wave,’ from the 1900s) and the charismatic movement (the ‘Second Wave,’ from the 1960s). Such a third wave movement, as Ruth Marshall writes, is intimately associated with the project of global evangelism, developed using theanthropologica methods of the evangelical Church Growth movement of the 1950s.’” Marshall, 98. More importantly the missionaries framed “spiritual warfare as a distinct doctrinal paradigm and evangelical technique was articulated as the basis of a new missiology from the late 1970s by American evangelicals refecting on their mission experiences amongst peoples of the global south.” Marshall, 98.

38 C. Peter Wagner and Rebecca Greenwood, “The Strategic-level Deliverance Model,” in Understanding Spiritual Warfare: Four Views, edited by James K. Beilby and Paul R. Eddy (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012) 179.

39 Wagner and Greenwood, 179.

Due to its correlations with indigenous spiritual engagement methods,41 the SLSW found its popularity among neo-Pentecostals in the global South. For example, such resonance gave rise to nuanced demonology such as “witchdemonology” among African Pentecostals,42 providing ways to map the advanced nature of demon possession through witchcraft. In addition, due to the SLSW teaching, various African Pentecostal deliverance ministries started to use “deliverance questionnaires,” which act as a spiritual mapping practice that provides the information “to all aspects of life . . . [and] to aid the process of diagnosis through which the presumed source of a person’s problems may be established.”43 Within the already existing spiritual reality in Africa, the use of questionnaires also resonated as a kind of “divination procedure,” which traditional healers used to identify malevolent spirits. Subsequently, pastors engage in

40 Marguerite G. Kraft, Understanding Spiritual Power: A Forgotten Dimension of Cross-Cultural Mission and Ministry (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2003), 193.

41 For an example of such correlation with indigenous spiritual engagements, see Hio-kee Ooi, “A Study of Strategic Level Spiritual Welfare from a Chinese Perspective,” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies 9 no 1 (2006). While Hio-kee Ooi provides critique of the “strategic-level spiritual warfare,” he gives a helpful analysis of how such a “spiritual warfare” language has been integrated by Pentecostals in the traditional Chinese context.

42 See Opoku Onyinah, “Contemporary ‘Witchdemonology’ in Africa,” International Review of Mission 93 (2004), 330–45.

43 Asomoah-Gyadu, 401.

240 | Allan Varghese long warfare prayers to cast out demons to bring healing and deliverance.44

Although the spiritual worldview in the global South enables Pentecostals to employ the spiritual warfare language in communicating the Gospel of Jesus Christ more experientially, the teachings of SLSW raise a few concerns. Some of these concerns are at the forefront for classical Pentecostals who remain reluctant to embrace such spiritual warfare teachings.45 Wonsuk Ma46 and Opoku Onyinah47 highlight some of the adverse theological and pastoral implications of SLSW teachings. Hence, it is not necessary to reiterate such concerns here. Nonetheless, as we seek to construct a warfare framework for public witness, it is important to highlight two public implications of strategic-level spiritual warfare.

First, the over-reliance on the various forms of SLSW has contributed to individualized Pentecostal spirituality, leaving public dimensions (socioeconomic and political) of spirituality lagging.

Although on the academic level, Pentecostal theologians afrm that Pentecostal soteriology provides “cosmopolitan deliverance,” “merging spheres of individuals enmeshed in social relations and networks comprising everyday activities across cultural, political, religious, economic and institutional territories,”48 on a grassroots level, there is a lapse in extending the liberating power of the Holy Spirit to socioeconomic structures using the warfare idiom. Consequently, the teachings of SLSW only contribute to the individual’s freedom from oppression. Pentecostal churches carry out worship services to anoint people for prosperity, protection, and healing. However, such fervor is lacking in dealing with public issues. Theologian David Tonghou Ngang communicates this discrepancy well. According to Ngang,

44 For an account of how the deliverance meetings are done, namely from an African context, see Onyinah 2004.

45 See Holvast and Ma.

46 Ma.

47 Opoku Onyinah, “Spiritual warfare: The Cosmic Confict between Good and Evil,” in The Routledge Handbook of Pentecostal Theology. edited by Wolfgang Vondey (New York: Routledge, 2020), 321–330.

The understanding here is that critical problems in people’s lives such as poverty, unavailability of opportunities for people to make their lives better, illnesses, and others, have a spiritual provenance. Thus it appears that if the spiritual provenance of the impediments to human progress is addressed, people can go on to live fourishing lives even when society in general has not created the atmosphere necessary for this to happen.49

In summation, while Pentecostal intervention into the existing spiritual worldview has led people to see the material dimension of salvation, it has also led to an individualized fourishing without any regard for common fourishing.

Secondly, if proponents of SLSW make any claims to impact the public realm, the imagined socioeconomic and political impact is of a triumphalist nature.

48 Wolfgang Vondey, Pentecostal Theology: Living the Full Gospel. Systematic Pentecostal and Charismatic Theology. (London: T & T Clark, 2017), 201.

49 David Tonghou Ngong, The Holy Spirit and Salvation in African Christian Theology: Imagining a More Hopeful Future for Africa. Bible & Theology in Africa. (New York: Peter Lang Inc, 2010), 128.

As indicated above, the infuence of dominionist theology, which proposes that Christians “have dominion” over all things (Gen 1:27), is evident in SLSW teachings. Whenever warfare prayers are done, proclaiming Jesus’ Lordship over all things, there is a strong assumption that “all ‘things’ includes the land, the environment, politics, education, science, medicine, healthcare, the arts, space, economics, social justice, and all the humanities.”50 Furthermore, there is a sense that the beneft of having dominion over all things by proclaiming the Lordship of Jesus is for those who are engaging the SLSW. Therefore, prayers are often for a particular Christian political leader to be in power so that the policies will be favorable for Christians. Concerns for non-Christians or the common good are not considered in such a spiritual warfare framework. Spiritual mapping and prayer walks are explicitly organized for their desired political candidate’s victory. Subsequently, anyone who stands against such a vision of structural impact, whether it be the non-Christian religious or political other, becomes personifed as the demonic enemy of God.51

For Gregory Boyd, this tone strikes as “triumphant theology” with “a new twist on the old Constantinian paradigm the church has been aficted with” in the past.52 Since Constantine, as Boyd notes, when “the church embraced the notion that they were to ‘manage the land,’” the all-important mandate of the New Testament to imitate Jesus by humbly serving the world tragically began to fade. Instead, the church of the crucifed Savior became the church “militant and triumphant.”53

50 Wagner and Greenwood, 192.

51 For a critical analysis on such demonizing Pentecostal/charismatic rhetoric, see Tony Richie, “Demonization, Discernment, and Deliverance in Interreligious Encounters” in Interdisciplinary and Religiou-cultural Discourses on a Spirit-flled World, edited by Veli-Matti Karkkainen, Kirsteen Kim and Amos Yong (New York: Pelgrave Macmillan, 2013) 171–184.

52 Gregory Boyd, “The Ground Level Delivery Model,” in Understanding Spiritual Warfare: Four Views, edited by James K. Beilby and Paul R. Eddy. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 214.

Therefore, for Pentecostals, who are very much at home with spiritual warfare language, there is a need to reimagine spiritual warfare, especially as a response to the triumphalist model of socio-political change initiated through the SLSW model. Pentecostals require a view of spiritual warfare that not only enables them to recognize the demonic in public structures but also provides a way “to protest and resist the social and cultural manifestations of evil” to bring change for the common good.54 Therefore, in the next section, I turn to reimagining spiritual warfare so that a vision for the public witness can be laid out.

In looking to re-imagine spiritual warfare that is conducive for public witness, although not a Pentecostal thinker, Walter Wink’s warfare model, the world systems model,55 is widely acknowledged to provide a structural interpretation. Wink understands the principalities and powers, or demons, as the spiritual dimension of this-worldly institutions and structures “that have betrayed their divine vocations.”56 Wink writes, “The foundation for understanding the principalities and powers is

53 Boyd, 214.

54 Vondey, 203.

55 Wink, Walter (edited by Gareth Higgins). “The World Systems Model,” in Understanding Spiritual Warfare: Four Views. Edited by James K. Beilby and, Paul R. Eddy. (Michigan: Baker Academic, 2012), 47-71.

56 Walter Wink, The Powers That Be: Theology for a New Millennium (New York: Doubleday, 1999), 27.

244 | Allan Varghese that they are fundamentally, essentially good.”57 Subsequently, for Wink, the present powers and principalities— that is, institutions, systems, and structures—are distorted due to their fallen-ness and, more specifcally, they are demonic “not because it has been seized by some external force, but [because] it abandons its divine vocation.”58 In other words, Wink refuses to see the New Testament language of powers as “personal free agents” but understands it as the “interior reality” of people groups or social structures or institutions.

Consequently, deliverance from oppression means transforming institutions, structures, and systems toward their divine-ordered vocation. In pursuit of such transformation, the church’s responsibility is to “name, unmask, and engage” these structures.59 However, deliverance is not a matter of trying to cast out any malevolent beings or force these institutions to be something they never were. Instead, it is “a matter of calling them back to the vocation that they had at their foundation.”60

In one sense, Wink’s understanding of institutions and structures as non-demonic or evil should be heeded. They are God-given institutions for human fourishing and, therefore, are good. Consequently, any warfare is not to demolish the structures but to bring them back to their divine vocation. However, in another sense, it will be challenging to integrate Wink’s attempt to depersonalize the demonic with the Pentecostal worldview, where demons are understood to be personal. Furthermore, it also fails to represent the biblical attribution of specifc being-ness to Satan.

57 Walter Wink, “Principalities and Powers: A Diferent Worldview,” Church & Society 85, no 5 (1995), 19.

58 Wink, 26.

59 James K. Beilby, and Paul R. Eddy, “Introduction,” in Understanding Spiritual Warfare: Four Views, edited by James K. Beilby and Paul R. Eddy (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012), 32.

60 Winks, 26.

In the Pentecostal context, Paul’s words, “For our struggle not against enemies of blood and fesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Eph 6:12, NRSV), are taken as a clear reminder of spiritual warfare.61 The verse read broadly within the New Testament context, provides further evidence toward a spiritual warfare framework that understands Satan as a spiritual being who is the force of evil. As Gregory Boyd writes, Satan is still viewed as “the god of this world (2 Cor 4:4), “the ruler of the power of the air” (Eph 2:2) who heads up a rebel kingdom (Rev 9:7-11) and through whom he still controls “the whole world (1 Jn 5:19). He is the “adversary” who “like a roaring lion…prowls around, looking for someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8).62

Ephesians 6:12 only further amplifes such an understanding of Satan, as a spiritual being trying to devour those who belong to the kingdom of God.

61 For a discussion on approaching Ephesians 6: 10-18 with Pentecostal spirituality, see J Ayodeji Adewuya 2012, “The Spiritual Powers of Ephesians 6:10-18 in the Light of African Pentecostal Spirituality.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 22, no 2 (2012). For a discussion on the various hermeneutical approaches to understanding the evil powers in Ephesians, see Annang Asumang, “Powers of Darkness: An Evaluation of Three Hermeneutical Approaches to the Evil Powers in Ephesians,” Conspectus 5 (March 2008)

62 Gregory A. Boyd, God at War: The Bible and Spiritual Confict. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 276.

Furthermore, the reputation of the city of Ephesus in the New Testament adds more reason to see Satan as an independent being. Scholars have noted that the city of Ephesus was known as a center for magical practices,63 with “the temple of the goddess Diana looming high over the city.”64 In this city, the seven sons of Sceva were unable to exorcise the demons (Acts 19:15, 17), indicating the city’s heavy demonic presence. Moreover, as Paul begins the book of Ephesians, his exhortation communicates his awareness of demonic presence. Consequently, Paul establishes that Jesus has won the victory over “all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come. And he has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church” (Eph 1:21, 22, NRSV).

Subsequently, in Ephesians 6, while the “spiritual and malevolent nature of the evil powers is emphasized,”65 Paul urges them to engage in spiritual warfare through “Christian life.”66 The armor of God is given to the believer to engage in spiritual warfare to resist the enemy who is not fesh and blood but the invisible Satan (Eph 6: 13–17). In other words, there are real spiritual satanic powers. If they are not and “were merely this-worldly,” as Esther Acolatse puts it, “the invitation to shore oneself up with the whole armor of God would be an act of overdressing!”67

63 Clinton E. Arnold, Powers of Darkness: Principalities & Powers in Paul’s Letters. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 149.

64 Asumang, 3.

65 Ibid., 6.

66 Arnold, 153.

67 Esther Acolatse, Powers, Principalities, and the Spirit: Biblical Realism in Africa and the West. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018), 198.

While it is essential to recognize that this world’s social structures and institutions have a spiritual nature that is oppressive, as Wink rightly notes, it is also equally important to note that such an oppressive nature is due to the cosmic spiritual battle of Satan against God’s kingdom. Even though Satan does not have fesh and blood, its being-ness is afrmed in the New Testament. From this perspective, as Asumang notes, “where Wink erred was to deny any particular infuence of personal spirits in implementing the stratagems of the evil powers. In so doing, not only is the teaching in Ephesians undermined, the negative efects of increased spiritism, witchcraft, and occultism in some societies are ignored.”68 Consequently, for the Pentecostals, Wink’s understanding of the powers as world structures would require further modifcation to incorporate it as a spiritual warfare framework.

In light of the above discussion on SLSW, it is important to recognize the errors of third wavers who often over-emphasize Satan’s being-ness in the worldly realm. If the third wavers have leaned too far into acknowledging the being-ness of demons and demonic presence in the world, Wink has gone too far the other way, failing to recognize demonic being-ness. However, an intermediate approach between the SLSW model and world systems model not only does justice to the New Testament understanding of cosmic powers but is also acceptable for global Pentecostals who are at home with the idiom of spiritual warfare. In such an approach, we not only acknowledge the being-ness of Satan and demonic infuence in the public realm, but we do so without giving unnecessary attention to Satan, which Opoku Onyinah identifes as a “serious problem” among 68 Asumang,

248

| Allan Varghese

Pentecostals who advocate for ‘SLSW teachings.69 In other words, a robust Pentecostal understanding of spiritual warfare that is carved through the middle of the SLSW model and the world systems model acknowledges that, to use Onyinah’s words,

The defeat of the demonic realm was demonstrated in Jesus’ ministry of exorcism and climaxed in his death and resurrection. [Therefore] Believers have been rescued from the kingdom of darkness and have been transferred into the kingdom of Christ. Yet the devil and his cohort are active and work through schemes. Christians are not to be afraid of them but rather to resist them through the application of the word of God and praying in the Spirit.70

Consequently, the various methods of public witnesses by Pentecostals become part of spiritual warfare, meaning their Christian presence and engagement becomes part of the warfare strategy of resisting the a) unseen satanic beings who actively scheme to derail God’s plans and b) the seen oppressive social, political structures, and policies that perpetuate oppression, inequality, and abuse of power.

However, the church’s presence and activities in spiritual warfare should be seen in light of Christian eschatology. Like other non-Pentecostal Christians, the Pentecostals see “themselves as the eschatological people of God,”71 where they believe that the inaugurated reality of the Kingdom of God commenced in the resurrection of the crucifed Christ

69 Onyinah, 324.

70 Onyinah, 329.

71 Ngang, 127.

“but awaits its fnal consummation in the future Parousia.”72 Therefore, today’s church lives in the already not yet stage.

Subsequently, as the church awaits the full consummation, Pentecostal inaugurated eschatology leads the church not to be inward oriented but to proclaim the nature of the coming Kingdom of God. In doing so, the church becomes a change agent. As Brian Myers notes, the church accepts people, “knowing that the Spirit of God celebrates the good, unmasks the evil, and calls for the most fundamental change in everyone.”73 However, as Mark Catledge notes, the church’s approach to change is “in a dual action of blessing and resisting,”74 blessing the world with various means of healing and deliverance brought by the Holy Spirit as a foretaste of what is to come, and resisting oppression in anticipation of the fullness of the coming kingdom. For Pentecostals, such a dual action (blessing and resisting) in light of its eschatological vision becomes acts of warfare against Satan, especially within the Pentecostal cosmology that views sin and demonic forces as the primary source of oppression and pain. In such a spiritual warfare framework, on one end, the social welfare actions can be seen as acts of blessing. On the other, the church’s various advocacy eforts and liturgical practice in the context of injustice can also be taken as acts of resistance. Through both practices of blessings and resistance, the ecclesial community wages war against unseen satanic begin who attempt to derail people from God’s plan of life and redemption.

72 Mark J. Cartledge, “Renewal Theology and the ‘Common Good.’” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 25, no 1 (2016), 101. For a discussion on the Pentecostal take on eschatology, see Peter Althouse, “‘Left behind’ - Fact or Fiction: Ecumenical Dilemmas of the Fundamentalist Millenarian Tensions within Pentecostalism,” Journal of Pentecostal Theology 13, no 2 (2005), 201.

73 Bryant L. Myers, Walking With the Poor: Principles and Practices of Transformational Development. rev. ed. (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2011), 85.

74 Cartledge, 102.

250 | Allan Varghese

In numerous parts of the world, socially compassionate actions went hand in hand with Pentecostals. However, from a spiritual warfare framework, such acts of social engagement can be reimagined as a fght against the spiritual forces perpetuating oppressive conditions. Ephesians 6: 13–17 provides a scriptural rationale for a Christian lifestyle of spiritual warfare where every believer is life indicates truth, righteousness, and the Gospel of peace, and salvation is an ofensive weapon of God’s armor to stand against the enemy. Therefore, any socially compassionate action from a believer to alleviate pain and bring life in accordance with truth, righteousness, and peace becomes an assailing force against satanic spiritual power that operates to keep people under oppressive conditions.

Furthermore, any social action by the church will inevitably demonstrate the character of the kingdom of God as “an alternative lifestyle in (and for) the world.”75 The local church’s character and mission, which is modeled after the life of Jesus Christ, follow “the law of love as it advocates with and for others as God advocates for the world.”76 In this pursuit, the church’s existence and any social action eforts to bless anyone become part of spiritual warfare against unseen satanic spirits that infuence visible social structures to be dominant and oppressive forces.

75 Stephen F. Ofutt, David Bronkema, Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy, Robb Davis, and Gregg Okesson, Advocating for Justice: An Evangelical Vision for Transforming Systems and Structures. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2016), 112.

76 Ofutt et al., 112.