Pastor John Lathrop talks about the inescapable reality of conflict in the body of Christ.

Image: Iren Petrova

The apostle Paul, writing to Timothy, said “If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer, he desires a noble task” (1 Tim. 3:1, NIV). The work is definitely noble but the task is not always easy. Timothy knew that because he was in the troubled church of Ephesus at the time when Paul wrote to him. Paul also knew that the ministry is difficult. Conflict is all too often a part of Christian ministry. In this brief article, we explore three kinds of conflict that a minister may encounter in the church. Paul was experienced in all of them and so I will focus our attention on his experience.

Introduction

Conflict. It seems to be found in almost every area of life in our world; it is even found in the church. The presence of conflict among the people of God is confirmed by both Scripture and experience. A simple reading of the New Testament will show that the early church experienced conflicts of different kinds among its own members. In addition, if you have been a Christian for any length of time, and especially if you have been involved in Christian leadership in any capacity, then you know that conflict is still very much with us today. In his book Body Life pastor Ray Stedman includes a humorous little rhyme that is descriptive of this challenging aspect of church life.

To dwell above with saints we love,
Oh that will be glory.
But to live below, with saints we know;
Well, that’s a different story!¹

In my book, Answer the Prayer of Jesus: A Call for Biblical Unity, I say that this rhyme “may be closer to home than we would like to admit.”²

Conflict in the church is almost inevitable and it exists for a variety of reasons. In many cases it can be counterproductive and very painful; it saps our strength, troubles our emotions, and strains our relationships. At other times conflict, though painful, may be necessary for the health and wellbeing of the church. In this brief article we will survey texts that set forth three different types of conflict that the early church experienced. All of the examples that I will cite involve the apostle Paul. That being said, one need not be an apostle to encounter conflict in the church. Pastors, teachers, evangelists, deacons and others can also experience it. In fact, anyone serving in Christian ministry can find themselves involved in conflict. All of the texts that we will look at concern disputes between believers. I will not address the believer’s conflict with evil spirits (Eph. 6:10-12) or with unbelievers (Mark 13:13; John 17:14). The three areas of conflict I will focus on are: those between spiritual leaders, between church members, and between a spiritual leader and a congregation. The purpose of this brief study is to acquaint the reader with the types of conflict that one can encounter in the church, help him or her identify the issues involved, and help prepare them to handle these conflicts when they arise.

It is rare to find a very readable and theologically sound volume that examines current missiological issues perceptively with historical backgrounds, biblical exegesis, and practical insight by a recognized giant in the field. David Hesselgrave covers ten key topics such as sovereignty and free will, whether one can be saved without hearing the gospel and trusting Christ, whether common ground is possible to find with other religions, holism and prioritism, the missionary models of Christ and Paul, spiritual warfare, the essence of a missionary “call,” contextualization, prophetic alerts, and the real purpose of missions. The volume has forewords by both Ralph Winter and Andreas Köstenberger.

Each chapter runs about 35 pages and is interesting, readable, informative, thought provoking, and practical. The issues are as the title suggests–key. Each deals with seminal truths. Hesselgrave believes and applies the inerrancy of the Scriptures. Twelve illustrations dot the book, including a chart demonstrating four ministries of the Holy Spirit in missions (p. 193). Each chapter includes a bibliography averaging about thirty important recent sources, including periodical articles. Hesselgrave is fully abreast of the thinking on each topic and explains why each is so vital to understanding and accomplishing the true task of the Great Commission. In citing the history of the modern missions movement, Hesselgrave is not afraid to critique friend and foe alike, but with a kind and gentle spirit. He chides the downward drift in the World Council of Churches’ missions programs and warns of similar slides in current movements. He discusses Kraft’s contextualization and the TNIV, concluding that both do damage to “the verbal-plenary understanding of revelation and inspiration.” Hesselgrave agrees with Alva McClain and Robert Culver on the meaning and purpose of church, kingdom, Scripture, and mission, and contrasts that with the mistaken views of George Ladd, James Engel and William Dyrness. The volume also contains a helpful nine page subject index and a three page Scripture index.

On the issue of common ground, Hesselgrave notes that most, if not all, of the similarities between Christianity and other religions are too flimsy and not true parallels. For example, “The Allah of the Qur’an is very unlike the Triune God of the Bible” (p. 99). The only real common ground is that all people in every culture are sinners. One of the bluntest statements Hesselgrave makes, after a search for common ground in other religions is, “Perry is right when he avers that the various religions represent ways in which humankind is being led away from God, not toward him” (p. 102). He adds, “Dissimilarities may in fact prove to be more useful than similarities in communicating Christ and the gospel. This often is the way that new knowledge and understanding are attained. After all, the Christian faith (in its revelation if not always in its practice) is absolutely unique. There is no other faith like it” (p. 105).

Regarding the common ground of sin, Hesselgrave points out that all of us are sinners before a holy God. “That is the common ground on which both Christian missionaries and their non-Christian hearers stand. We must not only admit it; we must insist upon it. If there is any one key that unlocks the door to common ground it is ‘missionary self-exposure.’ … So sin and sinnerhood can and must be explained. But how much easier to understand if they are permitted actually to see a sinner” (pp. 111-112).

Editor note: Readers are encouraged to join this conversation about strategic-level spiritual warfare, spiritual mapping, and living the Spirit-filled life. Please add your comments under the article.

Worldviews in Conflict (Part 1) with Editor Introduction

Satan in the Bible

When dealing with the related doctrines of Satan and demons, it has become almost customary to cite the warning from C.S. Lewis that two equal excesses persist.³² One is to dismiss the reality of Satan altogether, which is difficult to do if one interprets the New Testament literally. The other, I believe, is to become perilously indulgent with “devil-talk.” It seems fair to say that early twentieth century Pentecostals, in general, were preoccupied with talk of Spirit-baptism. Similarly today, some church leaders may be guilty of over-emphasizing Satan’s power to the point that the devil has grown larger than life—certainly larger than Scripture presents him.

Whether or not Satan once held a prominent position in heaven before he rebelled is a moot point. Popular interpretations of Isaiah 14:12-15 (reputed to be the account of Satan’s fall) in the U.S. were once fueled by American fundamentalist scholars such as M.F. Unger and L.S. Chafer.³³ More recent scholarship reveals a much sharper division over the assumption that Isaiah had Satan in mind when he wrote 14:12-15.³⁴ In fact, in view of the scant references to the devil or demons between Genesis and Malachi, and the complicated use of the name, “Satan,” it may be impossible to identify and organize a biblical demonology based solely on the Old Testament. As Page remarks:

Satan is a very minor figure in the Old Testament, where he is mentioned explicitly in only three passages. Even in these, he plays a secondary, not a major role. … It appears that the concept of Satan was not well developed in the Old Testament period and that it did not exercise the sort of influence on the faith of ancient Israel that it would on late Judaism and early Christianity.³⁵

Satan’s prominence in Jewish literature more likely arose at the time of the worst persecutions of Israel’s history, under the ruthless Antiochus IV during the late second century B.C. As the Jewish people suffered unimaginable oppression and suffering,³⁶ they searched for answers of cosmic proportions. They longed for a Messianic visitation to deliver them from hellish conditions, and they found their answers to the problem of evil in the cosmic struggle between angels and Satan.³⁷ Thus, extra-canonical literature was reared out of a background of Hellenistic and Persian Dualism and the desperate hope of an anguished nation.

Editor’s Introduction to Worldviews in Conflict

Welcome to the Dialogue

It is my privilege to introduce this paper by Larry Taylor and a dialogue about a practice many have embraced without first weighing the theological consequences.

Our subject is the teaching of spiritual mapping, identifying and expelling territorial demonic forces. This teaching has not been extensively challenged in Pentecostal/charismatic writings. In fact, the opposite appears to be true, the practice of spiritual mapping has been readily accepted.

Not just to rock the boat, Professor Taylor of Portland Bible College is asking us to consider on what basis this teaching has been accepted. Is spiritual mapping biblical doctrine, or is it derived from another source?

If spiritual mapping is a biblical teaching, we perhaps should all be involved in identifying and systematically removing the forces of evil from our neighborhoods and nations. If spiritual mapping cannot stand on scriptural grounds, its validity and our participation should be evaluated in that light.

Brother Taylor has invited response and interaction with himself on this subject. The Pneuma Review’s editorial committee has been endeavoring to locate a participant to respond to this paper. If all goes as planned, Taylor’s paper will be presented in two parts, followed by a rejoinder by someone offering another view of spiritual mapping, then followed by a response by Taylor. You are invited to write in and interact with this subject, whether you have an insight or a disagreement.

As with all articles, and especially controversial ones, the views expressed in this dialogue are not necessarily the views of all of the editors or the membership of the Pneuma Foundation. It is our privilege to present differing viewpoints that encourage the free exchange of ideas among disciples of Jesus. I hope that you will participate in this discussion. Please add your comments below.

— Raul Mock, Executive Editor

“The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to the texts of Scripture, is to jeer and flout him, for he cannot bear scorn.”
– Martin Luther

In recent years it has become increasingly clear that the devil is not going to go away, either in reality or as a topic of immense importance. In the past four decades he has gained attention at the box office and, more recently, at various church leadership conferences under the billing of “spiritual warfare.” Hollywood has enjoyed a disturbing love affair with the devil, dating back to Rosemary’s Baby in the late 60’s, which was soon followed by the smashing success of The Exorcist in 1973. Thanks (in no small part) to the computer industry, patrons today are offered a steady diet of scurrilous gore involving pools of blood, projectile vomiting, super-powered demons, twisted witches and candle-lit satanic rituals set in Gothic style.

On the other hand, the entertainment industry is not alone in its interest in and fascination with the macabre. In at least one segment of the church, there is a renewed militancy aimed at escalating the arms race against the devil and his horde. The most innovative aspect of this aggressive strategy involves “spiritual mapping.”¹ This is the practice of strategically locating and identifying the distinct demonic forces that lay behind a city or region, naming the demons, and driving them out. Although the practice is not limited to Pentecostal-type churches, the theological ideas that support it fit comfortably in many Pentecostal and Charismatic churches today.

In this particular paper I will explore the biblical and theological problems that I believe are associated with spiritual mapping, while focusing much of my attention on assessing the distinct cosmology that appears to serve as the basis for the practice. It is my theory that a weak, unbiblical cosmology has served to promote the doctrine of spiritual mapping. I open the subject by explaining the practical importance of cosmology. Secondly, I examine the biblical doctrine of creation, searching for a valid Christian cosmology. Turning briefly to the area of demonology, I examine Scripture’s view of Satan, particularly his power in relation to believers. Fourthly, I offer a biblical assessment of the practice of spiritual mapping. Finally, I conclude with a practical observation of the current state of Pentecostal-type churches and offer a pastoral call to return to basic-life teaching.

Due to the limited objectives of this particular study, I will not be assessing every aspect of the practice of spiritual mapping. There may be spiritual, psychological, and ecclesiastical rewards from the practice that lie outside the scope of this study. Moreover, I do not intend to present a thorough doctrine of Satan and demons. There are numerous books on the subject, some recent, that superbly handle the doctrine of Satan and demons. I have noted several for the benefit of the reader at the conclusion of the article.