Territorial Spirits: A critical look at a new “key” to evangelization by Mike Wakely

 This article was originally published in 2015 by the Evangelical Missionary Quarterly, (Vol 51, No 2).  As far as I can see the essay is not available online. Thankfully the author is a friend, so here it is. 

 Mike Wakely has spent his entire working life engaged in missionary outreach in Asia with Operation Mobilisation. He is still at work – raising funds for the children who need schooling in Pakistan. If that is a cause that interests you, google him, and I am sure you’ll be able to make contact. 

Mike is also the author of the very helpful book, ‘Can It Be True?’ It deals with how doubt can creep up on all of us and what the best response is. It is very helpful. You can find it on Amazon.

 Mike lives his Christian life in the centre ground, anchored in Scripture, and the need to help the poor. Having served in India, Nepal, and Pakistan he understands that Christian mission has no easy answers. Much is mystery. Hence his response to a teaching that became popular about twenty years ago, and still lurks in the background of some people’s praying.

  Enjoy this gentlemanly demolition of dodgy teaching.

             A new theology of the unseen world is making a huge impact on strategies for world missions and evangelization. Popularized by Frank Peretti’s novels, it has been given respectability by a number of books and given a very wide public platform through the AD2000 and Beyond movement. With this new theology has come a new vocabulary that unfolds what it is all about:

 

Territorial spirits. A hierarchy of demons (authorities and powers, etc.) who have been assigned to specific geographical areas. The main proof text is Daniel 10, which refers to the “Prince of Persia” and the “Prince of Greece.”

 Strategic-level spiritual warfare. A certain kind of intercession. According to C. Peter Wagner, ground-level spiritual warfare refers to the casting out of demons from people, occult-level spiritual warfare deals with “shamans, New Age channelers, occult practitioners, witches and warlocks, satanist priests, fortune-tellers and the like,”1 and strategic-level spiritual warfare contends with “an even more ominous concentration of demonic power: territorial spirits.”2

 

Spiritual mapping. A new way of saying “research and spiritual discernment”—“an attempt to see a city or a nation or the world ¬as it really is, not as it appears to be.””3 It includes discovering where demons are most active and powerful, why they are able to hold onto those powers, and also what their names are. “Accurate spiritual mapping is based on quality historical research,” says Wagner.4 The AD2000 and Beyond Movement is establishing a Center for Spiritual Mapping.

 

The 10/40 window. The spiritually barren nations between the latitudes of 10 and 40 degrees north. However, George Otis goes further and implies spiritual significance to the area as the last shrinking bastion of demonic possession. Noting that the garden of Eden (Iran and Iraq) are at the “geographical bull’s eye” of the window, he notes that “of the many ideas on the subject of how God might intend to wind down the historical process and bring closure to world evangelization, one of the more interesting is the theory that the armies of the Lord are currently being vectored toward Eden. . . . In fact the only thing necessary for this theory to become reality is for the evangelistic forces currently surrounding the window to continue their inward advance at a more or less uniform pace.”5

 

Various other concepts spin off this theology: remitting (or making atonement for) the sins of nations as part of the prayer strategy against demonic influence in a nation; the demonization of a nation, the assumption that demons take over nations, cultures, religions, and societies as well as people.

 

This new theology of intercession and missions raises many questions. Because it has become a central plank of the AD2000 and Beyond Movement, it is essential to examine its foundations. There are clearly some positive benefits:

l. The emphasis on prayer and intercession for the nations, and the enthusiasm that has been stirred by the whole movement and its literature.

 

2. The renewed missions focus on the 10/40 window, which encompasses a high percentage of the least evangelized peoples in the world.

 

3. Results coming from the prayer emphasis and focus. Even if our theologies of prayer are perhaps not altogether correct, God surely hears and answers sincere and committed intercession.

 

4. It has harnessed the power of the imagination to assist intercession.

 

5. It has given a clear and manageable strategy for evangelization and prayer, providing for direction and purpose in approaching cities, areas, and countries.

 

6. It has excited a high degree of anticipation, expectation, and faith. More heat perhaps than light, but real heat nevertheless. The literature on this teaching is replete with examples of its success, often drawn from Latin America and Africa, as evidence of the truth of its teaching, and it is right to hesitate before criticizing a teaching which appears to work when put to the test. However, the end does not justify the means, and truth, rather than success, is our most valuable asset. If we surrender truth for a pragmatic moment of enthusiasm which catches the public’s imagination, we will have a short-term gain and a long-term setback. This concern leads me to express the following reservations about the movement, its theology, and its literature.

 

1.     It is a new theology, not rooted in historical understanding or scholarship.

 Wagner expresses surprise that, out of all the books on angelology or demonology in the Fuller Seminary library, he could find only five that “made any reference at all to territories, and of the five only three discussed the issues a bit, but clearly in a secondary way.”6 After 2,000 years of theological scholarship, that fact alone should make us question the emphasis that this teaching is now receiving. Wagner does say that he suspects this teaching must have historical roots, but they are as yet unclear.7 If these amazing things have lain in Scripture for all these years, why has no one seen them? “Bringing down territorial spirits identified with specific geographical areas is a fairly new concept,” admits Steven Lawson.8

 2.     There is very little biblical evidence of this world view.

 Even its advocates admit that there is little biblical teaching on the subject of the territoriality of a demonic hierarchy. Most  of the teaching is therefore drawn from the experiences of missionaries and Christian workers and not from the Bible. Wagner admits that his conclusions are sometimes personal guesswork: “Nothing in this verse itself (Eph. 6:12) indicates that one or more of these categories would necessarily fit the description of territorial spirits, but many, including myself, feel it is highly probable.”9

 

David Pawson says:

 

Though Scriptures are now claimed to support the method, its origins did not lie in the rediscovery of the biblical nature of mission. When examined in the light of Scripture, the evidence is meagre. . . . There are only two verses in the whole Bible that explicitly describe “territorial spirits” (Daniel 10:13, 20). Even then, it is not entirely clear whether the “princes” of Persia and Greece are human or demonic, though most scholars assume the latter. . . .  There is certainly no trace of starting missions in any new place by binding the local demonic ruler, no hint that Paul sought to identify and bind the spirits of Athens or Corinth before preaching there. Were this an essential prerequisite for releasing a situation, it would surely have been specifically included in the ascending Lord’s missionary mandate. There is no apostolic precedent, either in precept or practice. Neither is there any command for believers to “bind” the devil.10

 

Apart from Daniel 10, some other biblical evidence is offered for the territorial nature of demonic activity: the King of Tyre (Ezek. 28:12), the spirit of Babylon (Rev. 17:3-5), Bel in Babylon (Jer. 51:44), Baal-Zebub of Ekron (2 Kings 1:2, 3), and Apollyon of the underworld (Rev. 9:11), but these are small shreds of evidence on which to build a comprehensive view of a demonic hierarchy.

 

It is quite widely admitted that “the examples of territorial spirits in the New Testament are limited.”11 The harlot of Revelation 17 “is the most explicit example I have found of a demonic spirit controlling nations and peoples.”12 Given the many other interpretations of the harlot in Revelation 17, that is a clear way of saying that New Testament evidence is extremely thin. It seems very risky to build such a doctrine on so little evidence.

 

In contrast to the teaching on territorial spirits, the New Testament seems to indicate that demons need people (and on occasion animals) in which to dwell, rather than regions, houses, or territories. In Matthew 12:43-46 the unclean spirit finds no rest as he wanders through waterless places. “Then he says, ¬I will return to my house from which I came.”ÿ Just as God in the New Testament makes our bodies his temple, so it appears that demons need a human body for their home on earth.

 

A major emphasis of the teaching is that it is not only people who are demonized, but “social structures such as governments or industries.”13 “Social structures are not, in themselves, demonic, but they can be and often are demonized by some extremely pernicious and dominating demonic personalities, which I call territorial spirits.”14 No biblical evidence is offered for this belief, and it appears to be one of the areas that actually goes against biblical revelation.

 

The apostle Paul says some extraordinarily nice things about governments and the ruling powers and our need to be in subjection to them, as they are appointed by God, sometimes a difficult teaching perhaps, but not to be ignored, especially as he wrote under the rule of the Roman emperors (Rom. 13:1-7). Peter says something similar (1 Pet. 2:13-17), and Paul commands us to pray for “kings and all who are in high positions” (1 Tim. 2:2).

 

3.     There is a lot of excellent research and sound biblical truth mixed with spectacular leaps into imagination and fantasy.

 

Wagner and Otis have gone into a lot of detailed research and study and much of what they teach is excellent and useful material. Suddenly they leap, without a warning, into wild and fantastic speculation and exercises of spectacular imagination.

 

For example: In Engaging the Enemy, after an excellent introduction on principles of spiritual warfare and prayer, Wagner moves without warning away from biblical foundations and into imaginative descriptions of the demonic hierarchy that rules the earth.

 

Larry Lea “identifies four levels of territorial warfare: (1) Principalities. These are individual demon spirits. (2) Powers. This group includes the captains of teams of spirits (such as Legion in Mark 5:9). (3) Rulers of darkness. This group includes regional spirits. (4)

Strongmen. These dominate wickedness in high places and oversee the other levels of

demonic activity.”15

 

Where did he get that picture of the demonic hierarchy? There is no suggestion that it is

founded on imaginative guesswork. In fairness to Wagner, he does admit that this is more

guesswork than biblical truth. “New Testament scholars cannot find a strict hierarchical

order in Ephesians 6:12 since the same Greek terms are used with different meanings and

interchangeably in other parts of Scripture.”16

 George Otis similarly intersperses good research with dramatic speculation and spectacular leaps of his lively imagination. Much of it makes for great reading, but bears little relation to revealed truth. Here is one example among many:

 While Adam and Eve’s moral breakdown led to their banishment from Eden, there is no indication in Scripture that the serpent went with them. Instead, there is striking evidence that the serpent of Eden has established a global command and control center atop the oily residue of the garden’s once flourishing vegetation and animal life.17

 Some exegesis of Scripture is very biased to the assumed world view and quite unsound. For example, the interpretation of the “strongman” who is to be bound (Matt. 12:29). This passage is not a call to spiritual warfare with a high-ranking demon. Jesus is answering the criticism that he is casting out demons by the power of “Beelzebul, the prince of demons.”

 

First, Jesus equates Beelzebul with Satan (v. 26) and not with some territorial spirit. Second, he tells a parable about a strong man. (The word is the normal adjective meaning “strong,” i.e., a tough guy, a strong person, and not the title of a senior demon.) There is no command to us to “bind.” The parable illustrates the need to deal with the enemy in a person’s life before the Spirit of God may take up residence. This parable and its vocabulary is grossly overused and its meaning distorted in the current movement.

 

4.     This world view owes more to Frank Peretti than to Scripture.

 All the books I have read acknowledge their debt to Frank Peretti. Peter Wagner says: “Undoubtedly, the single most influential event that has stimulated interest in strategic-level spiritual warfare among American Christians was the publication of Frank Peretti’s two novels, This Present Darkness and Piercing the Darkness. Many Christians who had scarcely given a thought to the possibility that events shaping human society could have a relationship to struggles among powerful supernatural beings are now openly talking about the likelihood. In fact, even though they know better, many find themselves reading This Present Darkness as a documentary rather than as somewhat fanciful fiction.”18

 Peretti’s books project a fantasy-land where good and bad angels fight it out on more or less equal terms, and the really nice people never get hurt. It is great fun, sensational and exciting, but not a faithful reflection of real life nor of the unseen world as the Bible reveals it.The theology of territorial spirits, spiritual mapping, and strategic-level spiritual warfare is also exciting, sensational (especially Otis’s more dramatic projections!) and quite spectacular.It carries many of the weaknesses of Peretti’s fantasies.

 

5.     The movement opens the door to endless varieties of even wilder excess, exaggeration, and extremism.

 

Once the basic criterion of scriptural truth has been replaced by the extra-biblical basis of personal experience, imagination, and feeling, the sky is the limit as to where this teaching could take excitable people.

 

Wagner quotes: “Dean Sherman suggests that one reason we need to do spiritual mapping is that Satan has already done his mapping. ¬Like any good general, Satan’s plans to rule the earth have begun with good maps. . . . Satan knows his battleground.”Sherman’s experience bears this out.”19 It would be better if Scripture agreed.

 

Wagner says that it is very important and helpful to find out the names of the territorial spirits. “Dick Bernal, one of the pioneers of contemporary strategic-level spiritual warfare, says: ¬I cannot be too emphatic. In dealing with the princes and rulers of the heavenlies, they must be identified.””20 One can imagine the chaos and confusion this is going to cause, and the absurd, if not dangerous, results of excitable and enthusiastic people desperate to identify the “angel of their city” or the demonic “strongmen” that supposedly rule their patch of the earth.

 

6.     The arguments are based on very limited and carefully selected experiences.

 

Wagner admits in Warfare Prayer that he draws most of his illustrations from Argentina. Why? (a) Because he has a lot of experience of Argentina; (b) because an Argentinian evangelist, Carlos Annacondia, has been practicing this method of prayer, based on this kind of world view, with considerable success; and © because Argentina is a success story at the present time.

 

What Wagner does not do is (a) give any examples of those who have practiced this world view and method without visible success, and (b) give examples of those who have seen great success, revival, people movements, and church growth with totally different methods and world view.

 

Further, he fails to give adequate attention to the likely alternative reasons why there is great church growth in Argentina and in other places where through history the church has grown. He also fails to mention why other churches and evangelists are seeing similar response in Argentina without practicing strategic-level spiritual warfare. That is not to decry the methods of Carlos Annacondia, but it is vital to see the whole picture if you are drawing theological conclusions from it.

 

7.     There is no New Testament precedent for prayer warfare against demons, except at a personal level.

 

David Pawson says, “One striking feature of engagement with demons by Jesus and others in the New Testament is that they never took the initiative. They never went looking for them. Only when demons manifested themselves were they confronted and banished and even then not always immediately, as if their interference was a distraction (Acts 16:18).21

 

Referring to the passage in Daniel 10, which is the only place where spiritual beings are

referred to in relation to specified territories, Pawson says: “What needs to be noted is that

Daniel did not directly engage them, nor was he commanded to do so. They were dealt with

by angelic intervention.”22

 Direct confrontation with demons in the New Testament is always at a personal level, when and as they manifest themselves in a person. The Bible does not command us to go looking for demons, demonic activity, or “strongholds.” Ephesians 6 tells us to put on the whole armor of God because of the reality and threat of the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. It does not tell us to go looking for that source of evil or to engage them in battle.  The exhortation is to be strong, protected, and equipped.

 

When the apostle Paul came into a heathen city he did not go around “mapping it,” looking for the centers of evil, or even praying down the strongholds. He took his spiritual sword and preached the gospel. His weapon against evil was his sword, the Word of God, and an open statement of the truth. Prayer without preaching is not envisaged.

 

8.     The danger of grasping for quick and easy answers to old problems.

 

Everyone involved in evangelism is looking for the “keys” to quick and guaranteed success. When a certain method meets with some success, books inevitably follow that outline the methods. For example, we have had the Don Richardson Peace Child method, the Bangladesh “contextualization” method, the Korean prayer mountain method, the John Wimber “Signs and Wonders” method, and many more. There is much to be learned from them all, but it is essential to recognize in them all:

 

§  God is sovereign, and he uses one way to reach people in one place and another way to reach people in another area—the Korean model may not work in Taiwan, any more than the Bangladesh method works in the Philippines;

§  there is much to be learned from them all, but the touchstone of usefulness must be biblical truth.

 

9.     This teaching gives an inadequate view of the fall of man, and hence an inadequate emphasis to human responsibility.

 

Otis states, “Because all human peoples belong to God initially by right of fatherhood, Satan has no automatic control over them. Unless individuals give themselves over to the rulership of Satan willingly, they will remain under the tender influence of the Holy Spirit. Satan’s objective, then, is to gain control over the lives of human beings by dominating the systems—political, economic and religious—that they have created.”23 The ensuing argument is obvious—once satanic control has been broken men will want to listen to the Holy Spirit and will turn to Christ.

However, this is not a biblical view of man’s evil, stubborn, and rebellious heart. (a) It underrates the results of man’s rebellion at the fall and the consequences of being descendants of Adam. (b) It gives inadequate emphasis to the deceitfulness of the human heart, pride, the weakness of the flesh, etc. (c) It delivers man of his responsibility for sin and for refusing to submit to Christ.

 

The Bible states that “the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Cor. 4:4). The “god of this world” could indeed be referring to demonic activity. It could equally well be referring to the “cares and riches and pleasure of life” (Luke 8:14) that choke the seed of the word. The apostle did not blame demons for man’s blindness, nor attempt to “bind” them or rebuke them. The whole passage is about “the open statement of the truth” and the preaching of “Jesus Christ as Lord.” Man carries responsibility for rejecting “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”

We fall into error when we forget that the enemies of the gospel are not only the devil, but also the world and the flesh, and the call to sinners is to repent and believe. The lust of the flesh, the deceitfulness of the heart, the attractiveness of the world, the power of the old man, the nature of Adam—all are allies of the devil, and man is responsible for his condition.  It is an error to blame demons for man’s stubborn rebellion, and naive to believe that man is just waiting to respond to the truth once the demons have been “bound.”

 10.  It presents a wholly distorted teaching on the biblical nature of prayer.

 Wagner says: “One of the reasons we need to exercise caution at this point is that we have no biblical examples of the 12 apostles or any other first-century Christian leaders who challenged the devil to a direct power encounter as Jesus did. . . . What happens when Christians today shout, ‘I bind you, Satan!’? Perhaps not as much as we would hope. Satan will eventually be bound for l,000 years, but it will be an angel who does it, not a human being.”24

 

Apart from direct encounters with demons at the moment of exorcism, there is no teaching, example, or exhortation in Scripture to address prayer to the devil or demons. But this is the emphasis of the movement—a new way to pray. Walter Wink writes, “This new element in prayer—the resistance of the Powers to God’s will—marks a decisive break with the notion that God is the cause of all that happens. . . . Prayer changes us, but it also changes what is possible for God.”25 That appears to be an extraordinarily arrogant undermining of God’s sovereignty.

 

A whole range of dramatic vocabulary is being built up around the “warfare prayer” concept, including “casting down strongholds,” “binding the strongman,” having a “power encounter” with the devil, “evicting the ruler of the city,” “taking dominion (or authority) over an area in Jesus’ name,” “storming the gates of hell,” and so on. What all this really means is sometimes hard to discern, except that it all has to do with giving direct attention to the devil and demons, which is something the Bible has not commanded us to do. In fact, it could be quite dangerous.

 

Prayer in the Scriptures is addressed to the Father, in the Spirit, and in Jesus’ name. Christ purchased a complete victory over Satan. He never commanded us to fight the devil on his behalf. Our business is with God, not Satan. We do not need to destroy Satan’s kingdom to build God’s kingdom here on earth.

11.  This teaching gives unhealthy attention to the devil and demonic activity.

 

It underemphasizes the finished work of the cross, as well as the work of the Holy Spirit and angels. There is no doubt that the central focus of “strategic-level spiritual warfare,” as well as spiritual mapping, and all that proceeds from this teaching, is the demonic. It gives sharp attention to demons and the strategies of the devil, how to find them, name them, engage them, take dominion over them, attack them, bind them, resist them, etc. But this is not the focus of the Scriptures, nor should it be that of the Christian.

 

What is missing? (a) A clear belief in the sovereignty and the centrality of God is missing, as is also the presence of the risen Christ with “all authority in heaven and on earth.” (b) The activity and supremacy of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer, in his prayer life, and in evangelism is understated. So also is the ministry of angels. (Are they supposedly territorially confined also?) (c) The total, finished accomplishment of the cross, central to the New Testament, is relegated to (1) the means by which prayer is effective in “binding” demons; (2) the means by which we know that the devil will finally be overcome; and (3) the means by which we are saved. The cross has infinitely more meaning in the life of the believer than this.

 

All of this does great discredit to God and the glory of the gospel, and gives much credit to man and the importance and power of his prayers.

 

Colossians 2:15 states: “Christ disarmed (divested himself of, discarded like a garment) the

rulers and authorities and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in it (the

cross).” Dick Lucas comments on this verse: “There is no call for the believing Christian to

make too much of the “strong man” and his armor, since “one stronger than he” has already

appeared to overcome him and take away the weapons in which he trusts. . . . Freedom from

demonic forces is no second or subsequent work of grace to be sought at the hand of God. It

is, simply, the gospel privilege for all.”26

 

Satan and his demonic assistants must never be allowed to take center stage in our theology or our practice. It is Jesus who has “all authority on . . . earth” (Matt. 28:18). He reigns “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come” (Eph. 1:21).

 

END NOTES

1. C. Peter Wagner, Warfare Prayer (Ventura, Calif.: Regal Books, 1992), p. 17.

2. Ibid., p. 18.

3. Ibid., p. 151.

4. Ibid., p. 153.

5. George Otis, Last of the Giants (Tarrytown, N.Y.: Chosen Books), p. 161.

6. Warfare Prayer, op. cit., p. 88.

7. C. Peter Wagner, Engaging the Enemy (Ventura, Calif.: Regal Books, 1991), p. 39.

8. Ibid.

9. Ibid., p. 19.

10. J. David Pawson, The Fourth Wave (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1993), p. 69.

11. Vernon J. Sterk, in Engaging the Enemy, op. cit., p. 153.

12. Wagner, Warfare Prayer, op. cit., p. 94.

13. Ibid., p. 102.

14. Ibid., p. 96.

15. Quoted by Steven Lawson in Engaging the Enemy, op. cit., p. 38.

16. Wagner, Warfare Prayer, op. cit., p. 63.

17. Otis, op. cit., p. 99.

18. Wagner, Warfare Prayer, op. cit., p. 19.

19. Ibid., p. 152.

20. Ibid., p. 150. 21. Pawson, op. cit., p. 69.

22. Ibid. 23. Otis, op. cit., p. 88.

24. Wagner, Warfare Prayer, op. cit., p. 56.

25. Walter Wink, Unmasking the Powers. Quoted in Warfare Prayer, op. cit., p. 95. 

26. R.C. Lucas, The Message of Colossians and Philemon (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1980), p. 109.

               

                    

                                                                                  

               

 

Articles / Global Report / On the Web / Editorials / Readers Write

EMQ Archives / Subscribe / EMIS Home / BGC Home

EMQ is published by Evangelism and Missions Information Service

of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL 60187

                                                   

Iran’s Church and Nationalism, Caution Needed

 Be careful

 Throw these two words together – nationalism and Christianity – and you have a toxic mix. Its effect can side-track Christians to focus on the fortunes of a particular country, instead of seeking first the kingdom of God. Worse, it can unleash racism into the church’s makeup.

 For the leaders of Iran’s growing church caution is needed. The Bible says ‘a little leaven leavens the whole lump’ (1 Corinthians 5:6). Nationalism in all countries is a potent force. It can do untold damage. The shepherds need to be watching carefully.

 Healthy Nationalism

 Applying the surgeon’s knife to nationalism in the church though needs care. For some things that might be called nationalism are normal and healthy.

 It is normal and healthy to love one’s own country and way of life. It is normal to want to take up arms to defend one’s country. And it is quite normal to want one’s government to act justly. So to speak out against government injustice is healthy, even a duty. The church must speak out when people are imprisoned, or, worse, executed, without a fair trial; or when there is bribery and corruption; or when there is racial discrimination. Silence is not an option. Salt has a taste. Light disrupts darkness. To speak truth to governmental powers, as Jesus did to Pilate[1], is a thoroughly Christian activity[2].

 And in Iran there is much for Christians to speak out against, especially injustice towards religious minorities and Iranians who were born Muslims, but have chosen to follow Christ. Hundreds of these Christians, if not thousands, have suffered at the hands of the Islamic Republic: the murder of loved ones, solitary confinement, abusive interrogations, loss of property and finances. And many Iranian Christians in the Diaspora have been forced from their homeland into exile. They want to prosper in their homeland, but they cannot because of the hostile and unfair attitude the government entertains towards Christians. It is quite right that a voice is raised to call out this suffering for what it is: cruel discrimination.

 This is healthy nationalism, perhaps a better word is patriotism. But this sits very near something that is less edifying.

 Unseemly Nationalism

 Unseemly nationalism is when we think that our country and culture is superior to all others. At best this can be nauseating; at worse it can be brutal and violent. This ugly nationalism is often fuelled by racism - ‘White is better than black’, ‘Aryan better than Arab’ – and the doctrine of Manifest Destiny, the idea that God has a special plan for a particular nation. [3]

 This type of nationalism has infected the church throughout history. In the 1930s nearly all the churches in Germany bowed to the sick and ugly nationalism of the Nazis. In the 1990s the Serbian Orthodox Church strengthened nationalism and Christian rhetoric and symbols were used to garner support for the war against the Bosnian Muslims[4]. More recently Christian Nationalism played a prominent role in the attack on the US Capitol building on 6^th January 2021[5]. This violence caused seven deaths and over a hundred injuries[6]. And since February 2022 the Russian Orthodox Church has consistently supported President Putin’s invasion of Ukraine[7].

 If ugly nationalism can infect churches in America, Europe, and Russia, it can also infect Iran’s growing churches. Church leaders need to have keen eyes and use a surgeon’s knife with precision.

 The danger for Iran’s church

 It would be completely unfair to suggest that Iran’s church leaders have embraced this sort of unseemly nationalism in anyway. They have not.

 But flirtation is possible and there are reasons for this.

 One is the Bible. In Isaiah 44 - 45 Iran’s ruler, Cyrus, is God’s favoured instrument for restoring the Jewish people. In Jeremiah 49 there is a prophecy about how God will restore the fortunes of Elam and set his throne there. Elam in Jeremiah’s time was a small kingdom in what became the south-west of Iran. It was never Iran. However, many Iranian Christians believe this prophecy should be applied to the whole of Iran. In the New Testament there are the wise men who visited Jesus. The Bible says they came from the East, many Iranians say they came from their country. The thinking is simplistic and illogical, but it has appeal. Iran is in the Bible; Iran is special.

 Another is the role of nationalism in Iran’s politics and history. It is strong. Iran’s monarchs were seen as God’s representatives on earth; their title was, ‘King of Kings’. The 1979 revolution just changed the title. Now Iran’s Supreme Leader is God’s representative on earth. Moreover, the narrative of the Islamic Revolution was strongly nationalistic. Ayatollah Khomeini successfully portrayed Reza Shah as a stooge of the West and a traitor to Iran. Hence a well-known revolutionary slogan was, ‘Neither East nor West, Iran is best’. It is this same narrative that holds sway today: only the Revolutionary Guards can protect Iran from her enemies.

 And then there is the richness of Iran’s culture and the beauty of the Persian language. Looking out to her neighbours - the Arabs, the Afghans, the Turks, the Pakistanis, and beyond to modern America – it is not difficult for the Iranian to feel that their civilisation and literature is exceptional, even superior.

 A role in the Bible, nationalistic politics, a rich civilisation. No wonder it is easy for Iranian Christians to think they are special to God – because they are Iranian. And so, just has happened with other countries, the idea comes in that God will deal with the entire nation of Iran, because the whole nation is special. This is where healthy nationalism edges towards unseemly nationalism.

 After the murder of Mahsa Amini and the ensuing protests[8], a woman shared a ‘prophecy’ at a conference that said the forty years in the wilderness was going to end[9]. The camera was pointing at the entire nation of Iran. In the aftermath of the twelve-day war with Israel and the US there were prayers where Iran – as a nation – was being led out of Pharaoh’s Egypt to cross the Red Sea into freedom. Likewise one Christian leader in prayer commanded the unseen powers controlling Iran to leave, and so bring freedom for Iran and Iranians. There is no prayer like this in the New Testament[10], but the point here is that the camera again was on the entire nation of Iran.

 If there is any flirtation with ugly nationalism it is this use of salvation language for the nation. It is possible to argue that the meaning behind this type of praying is simply the desire that people in Iran have an easier time, so we should not get too concerned as to how this desire is expressed.

 But words are important. And these are dangerous words because they connect Christians inside Iran with voices that are against the government. So making Christians inside Iran even more vulnerable than they already are.

 And there is another danger. This focus on salvation for a nation takes the church away from the New Testament.

 No unseemly nationalism in the New Testament

 There is none of this difficult type of nationalism in the New Testament. Indeed the writers are at pains to show that God has no favourite nation. Paul was robust on this topic, famously rebuking Peter when he displayed a tribal mind-set. (Galatians 2: 11 – 14).

 This anti-nationalistic paradigm was set up by Jesus. His teaching and miracles undermined Jewish nationalism[11]. His death, caused by Jewish nationalists[12]., was a terrible rebuke to the nationalistic way of thinking.

 Moreover Jesus made it clear that God’s time for working through Israel was coming to an end. This is what three parables teach: Matthew 21: 33 – 46, Matthew 22: 2 -14, Luke 14: 15 – 24. The answer to the question of how God was now going to work was equally clear: through God’s Kingdom working in Christ’s church. Jesus gave the keys of the kingdom, not to any political or national leader, but to Peter, the future leader of the church - Matthew 16:19.

 The New Testament emphasizes then that today the arena of God’s Kingdom activity is the church[13]. Apart from a reference in Romans 11 to Israel which relates to the Eschaton, there is no mention of God having any special plan for any nation in the New Testament. It is just not there. Hence if any Christian leader implies that God has a special plan for their country, that leader has gone ‘beyond what is written’ (1 Corinthians 4:6).

 Rather than engage in speculation about their country’s future, a wise Christian leader will focus on the issue that Jesus relentlessly focused on: The Kingdom of God.

 The Kingdom of God pushes unseemly nationalism to the margins

 Jesus’ ministry is dominated by teaching about the Kingdom of God[14]. And he told his followers that seeking the Kingdom of God and God’s righteousness must be their absolute priority (Matthew 6:33). Nothing else. This moves nationalism to the margins, for at least four reasons.

 Universal

 Firstly the Kingdom of God is international, universal. The crowd wanted Jesus to become the King of Israel (John 6:15) – and He escaped. Why? Because His work and his position were much greater than ruling a small country on the edge of the Roman Empire. His work was the salvation of mankind; his position was King of Kings. Christians are servants of Jesus and we must be faithful to His vision. We treat borders and countries lightly, working for the blessing of all people, serving the King of Kings.

 Future

 Nationalism is all about the present, but Jesus taught that the arrival of the full blessing of the Kingdom of God is in the future. He saw time as being divided into two ages. There is this ‘present age’ and there is ‘the age to come’. The Kingdom of God happens with ‘the age to come’. This is when there will be true freedom. This is when there will be perfect justice. This is when all tears will be wiped away.

 Today we are in the ‘present age’, and it’s not good. Jesus spoke of, ‘an evil and adulterous generation’, Paul talked about ‘this present evil age’. He also says that ‘Satan is the god of this age’. John says ‘the whole world is in the power of the evil one.’ Hence this age is dominated by sin, evil, death. This is not going to change until Christ returns. This is fundamental to the outlook of a Christian. There is no expectation that life on earth will get substantially better – until this present evil age is ended by the return of Jesus Christ. Hence Christians pray for God’s Kingdom to come. We say ‘Maranatha’, we pray for Christ to come. This is the time when humanity will be fully restored.

 There is nothing nationalistic about wanting conditions in a country to improve, even praying for a change of government. However no Christian puts that much hope in the shifting ways of human governments. Our hope is set on the return of Christ. And it should be noted that there is no prayer in the New Testament asking for a change of government, even though the governments of the day were authoritarian and oppressive. In fact, rather than praying for any government to change, there is an emphasis on supporting the government. Jesus said, ‘Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar’ (Mark 12:17), Paul wrote, ‘Submit to the governing authorities’ (Romans 13:1), and Peter added, ‘Honour the Emperor’ (1 Peter 2:17). Surely the reason for this outlook, apart from the misery of anarchy[15], is that the focus of Jesus, Paul, and Peter was on the future. There conviction about the coming Kingdom of God, put into perspective the suffering that all three endured at the hands of government officials.

 We further see this emphasis on the future in Paul’s letter to the Colossians. He tells them to set their minds ‘on things that are above, not on things that are on earth’, and to look forward to appearing with Christ ‘in glory’ (Colossians 3:2,4). And he told the Christians in Rome that ‘the sufferings of this present time (including suffering under an unjust government) are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed’. (Romans 8: 18). For Paul, it is the future that matters. The writer to the Hebrews in chapter 11 has the same emphasis. The men of faith see themselves as being ‘strangers and exiles on the earth’. While on earth, they are ‘desiring a better country, that is a heavenly one.’ Again, it is the future that matters.

 And because in the New Testament it is the future that matters, Peter tells us to focus on ‘hastening the Kingdom.’ (2 Peter 3:12). This is where our energy should go. Jesus said that neither He nor the angels knew when the end of this age would be (Matthew 24:36). However He did spell out how Christians can ‘hasten the end’, for there is a condition laid down for the Second Coming: ‘This gospel of the Kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.’ (Matthew 24:14). This means that proclaiming God’s kingdom in word and deed, to all nations, not just our own, this is what is important in Jesus’ eyes. Or as George Ladd puts it, ‘‘From the perspective of eternity, the mission of the Church is more important than the march of armies…’[16] And, in the context of this essay, we can add, more important than even our own country.

 As temporary residents in whatever country we have been born in, all Christians will have a normal longing for the conditions in their country to be wholesome. That longing though must be brought into the perspective of the New Testament, which asks us to continually be looking for the Kingdom of God which is to come. We live in the now, but we are constantly upheld by our hope for the future.

 And we have hope for the future, because the future has invaded the present. Yes, the fullness of the Kingdom of God is to come; but the reality of the Kingdom began with the coming, death, and resurrection of Christ.

 At Work Now

 The Kingdom of God is in the future, but it is at work now, even in the midst of this present evil age. It was initiated by Christ’s first coming. His miracles demonstrated its blessing, and through the cross and resurrection He broke the authority of sin, Satan, and death. This means that right now, Christians can ‘taste the powers of the age to come (Hebrews 6:5). That taste is primarily internal. The power of sin and Satan can be broken in a believer’s life, the fear of death taken away. It is not external or physical. As Paul writes, ‘The Kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit.’ (Romans 14:17). The impact of sin and Satan and death are still all around us during this age. As Jesus made clear in his parables of the wheat and tares or the fish in the net (Matthew 13), evil is not dealt with now. That separation comes with ‘the age to come’.

 The Kingdom of God is at work today – but how? Three things need to be emphasized. Each one pushes severe nationalism to the side-lines.

 Firstly the Kingdom of God works with individuals. There is no invitation for an entire nation or society to enter the Kingdom. The seed is sown, and different individual hearts have a different response. Jesus did not say that a nation had to be born again, He told Nicodemus, ‘You must be born again’ When Peter gave his invitation at the end of his sermon on the day of Pentecost, Luke does not tell us that a nation responded, he told us ‘there were added that day about three thousand souls’. The birthday of the church happened when individuals responded and joined together. Whenever Christians talk about the salvation of this country or that nation, they have moved away from the teaching of the New Testament. There is no salvation of any country in the New Testament, only the salvation of individuals[17].

 Secondly, Jesus said that the way the Kingdom works today is almost hidden, small, seemingly insignificant. Like a seed, like leaven (see Matthew 13, Mark 4)[18]. It is unnoticed by millions; but it is at work. All over the world there are Christian orphanages, hospitals, rehabilitation centres, literacy programmes, and much more, many started from small beginnings, but going on to bless many. And every day Christians engage in Kingdom work: visiting the sick, giving food to a widow, inviting someone to enter the Kingdom. In history Christians have rarely been found in the public places of a country, nor in the political offices; yet their work has influenced millions. Ugly nationalism tends to have a brash voice; that’s not the sound of the Kingdom of God.

 Thirdly, injustice is challenged. The Kingdom of God is about ‘righteousness’. As salt and light Christian will constantly be in conflict with rotten meat and dark practices. Or, as George Ladd puts it, ‘We go every day into this evil age with the life of heaven in our hearts. This is the Gospel of the Kingdom’[19]. Christians speak up against injustice, which is why in the history of the church there are many instances of injustice being overthrown by Christians, the abolition of slavery, and the overthrow of apartheid in South Africa being famous examples.

 It has not been difficult to show that that the New Testament is about the Kingdom of God, not some speculative special plan for a particular nation.

 What, though, about the Old Testament?

 No oxygen for unseemly nationalism in the Old Testament

 In the Old Testament the people of Israel are centre stage from Exodus onwards, and there is an abundance of prophecies about other nations - like Egypt, Babylon, Assyria, and Elam. The story of Israel and these prophecies have fuelled some Christians to predict dramatic changes for their own country. There could be much detailed discussion both about the paradigm of the Old Testament story, and how the prophecies might be applied, however for this essay we only have to draw back and honour three golden rules for reading the Bible.

 The New Testament Must Interpret The Old

 The first, articulated by Augustine, is that we have to let the New Testament interpret the Old, or, put another way, we have to see the Old Testament through the prism of the New. Both Paul and the writer to the Hebrews interprets the Old Testament in the light of Christ’s cross and resurrection; and Jesus himself said, ‘You have heard it was said…but I say to you’. The Old Testament must be read with our New Testament glasses on. Go straight to the Old Testament without those glasses and no Christian would eat pork[20], women would not wear trousers[21], and there would be a lot of stoning[22].

 Seen in the light of the New Testament the historical narrative of the Exodus has nothing to do with any nation today, but it has everything to do with the experience of individuals in the church. In 1 Corinthians 10 Paul says that the story of Israel crossing the Red Sea and entering the wilderness, ‘took place as an example for ‘us’. The ‘us’ is not a nation. The us is made up of individuals in the church.

 Likewise the many prophecies about different nations in the Old Testament, must be seen in the light of the teaching of Christ in the New Testament. This teaching is that all nations will be judged (see especially Matthew 25: 31-46). The Old Testament prophecies underline the truth of this teaching.

 What is clear must take precedent over that which is not clear

 The second golden rule is that unclear passages in the Bible must be clarified by ones where the meaning is plain. This was first pronounced by Tertullian: ‘Uncertain statements should be determined by certain ones, and obscure ones by such as are clear and plain.’

 This means that no teaching about Iran can be based on Jeremiah 49: 34 – 39, because the meaning of this verse is not that clear, especially since the country of Elam has long ceased to exist[23]. A Christian in their quiet time might find encouragement in this verse, but to make a public teaching from it would be to ignore this important rule for reading the Old Testament.

 Allegory only as used by the apostles

 When a New Testament writer uses an Old Testament story as an allegory he is using that allegory to teach the early Christians something about their faith[24]. They never use an allegory to teach believers about a special nation. Allegory is for the spiritual upbuilding of Christians, not politics. This is the legitimate way for Christians today to use stories from the Old Testament. Luther is scathing about people who take it upon themselves to make Scripture mean what they want it to mean: ‘He who either fabricates allegories without discrimination or follows such as are fabricated by others is not only deceived but also most seriously harmed…’ Then he gave this rule for allegories: ‘Hence allegories either must be avoided entirely or must be attempted with the utmost discrimination and brought into harmony with the rule in use by the apostles.’

 So, one cannot take stories from the Old Testament as allegories about Iran, or any other nation. This does not match up with building up an individual’s faith, the aim of the apostles. So in Galatians 4 Paul wants to encourage the individual believers to understand that, like Isaac, they are ‘children of promise.’ Or Peter wants to encourage his readers that like Noah’s family, they have been brought through the judgement of baptism (1 Peter 3:21).

 If these three golden rules for reading the Old Testament are remembered, there will be no oxygen for unseemly nationalism to grow in the ranks of faithful Christians. It is the duty of Bible teachers to ensure that the Old Testament is used to build up believers in the church, not to engage in exotic speculation about what God wants to do with a particular nation.

 Conclusion: A little leaven leavens the whole lump

 The story of the growth of the Muslim convert church in the Iran Region rightly commands the respect of Christendom. From being a small minority of a few hundred fifty years ago, Iranian Christians from a Muslim background must now be measured in their hundreds of thousands. The Diaspora Church has played a crucial role in this story of growth. When the Islamic Republic first unleashed its rage against the church, the focus had to be on survival, providing Scriptures and some training. This survival chapter has, thankfully, ended.

 The church chapter has begun. And here, small mistakes can be very costly. For in the foundation of a building, every millimetre is important, in the baking of good bread, every ingredient is important. To speak as if God’s attention is on a nation, rather than on the church, moves away from the New Testament. As the sad history of other churches has shown, this is a dangerous millimetre, a harmful ingredient. The plea of this essay is for church leaders to speak out against any teaching that implies that God has a special plan for Iran as a nation, and to constantly focus on the church, God’s arena of activity, and to teach about what Jesus taught about: The Kingdom of God.

  

[1] John 18:33 – 38; 19: 8 - 11

[2] For more on Jesus’ way of dealing with governmental injustice, see here https://sternfieldthoughts.blogspot.com/2022/11/government-injustice-jesus-rough.html

[3] Many white Americans believed it was their ‘manifest destiny’ to conquer and rule the North American continent; many in London believed the British Empire was a part of Britain’s ‘manifest destiny.’

[4] See https://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=theology_pubs ‘The Danger of Religious Nationalism’

[5] https://andrewwhitehead.substack.com/p/christian-nationalism-and-january Andrew Whitehead is the Professor of Sociology at the University of Indiana

[6] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/05/us/politics/jan-6-capitol-deaths.html

[7] For more details on the Russia’s nationalistic stance, see here - https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/russian-orthodox-church-declares-holy-war-against-ukraine-and-west/

[8] On September 13^th, 2022 22-year-old Mahsa Amini was arrested by Iran’s morality police in Tehran for not wearing her hijab properly. She died in police custody. Her death sparked off protests across Iran. These were put down brutally. It is alleged that over 500 were killed during these protests, including over 60 minors. At least seven protesters were executed.

[9] When the prophecy was given, the Islamic Republic was already 44 years old.

[10] This type of prayer probably reflects the teaching of the ‘Spiritual Mapping’ movement. For a well-argued critique of this movement see here, https://plymouthbrethren.org/article/418

[11] Jesus went to the Decapolis (Mark 5 and 7), spoke to the Samaritan woman by the well (John 4), helped the Centurion with the suffering servant (Matthew 8), and the Syrophoenician woman with the demon possessed daughter (Mark 7). In his teaching, we have a parable where the hero is a hated Samaritan (Luke 10: 30 – 37), and we have three parables saying that God has rejected the Jews - the parable of the tenants, the wedding feast, and the great banquet (Matthew 21: 33 – 46, Matthew 22: 2 -14, Luke 14: 15 – 24). As for the temple, the heart of Jewish nationalism, Jesus said it would be destroyed (Mark 13).

[12] Caiaphas was warned by his colleagues that the Romans will come ‘and take away our place (the temple) and our nation’ (John 11:.48) To this Caiaphas replied that, ‘one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.’ (John 11:50). Pilate confirmed this. He told Jesus, ‘Your own nation…has delivered you over to me’ (John 18:35). Jesus was crucified because of Jewish nationalists.

[13] Jesus promises to be present when the church gathers, Matthew 18:20; the Holy Spirit was poured out on the church, Acts 2 and 4; the gifts of the Holy Spirit operate in the church, 1 Corinthians 12; the poor are served by the church, Acts 6, the church is to be a witness to the nations, Matthew 24:14, and God’s ‘manifold wisdom’ is made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places, through the church, Epheisans 3:10.

[14] Jesus public ministry began with a call to repentance because the Kingdom of God was at hand (Mark 1:15), he went through all of Galilee, ‘proclaiming the gospel of the Kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23), much of his teaching, especially the parables, was about the Kingdom of God, on his last night he told his disciples that he would not drink wine with them again, until the Kingdom of God, and after his resurrection, he spoke to his apostles about the Kingdom of God (Acts 1:3).

[15] Very genuinely many Iranians will say they just want the present government to go. There is then no clear answer to the question: what next? From recent history in Iraq and Afghanistan it is very likely there would be civil war, even anarchy. The idea that the Revolutionary Guards will just lay down all their weapons and economic interests to welcome in Western leaning democrats seems rather fanciful.

[16] From George Eldon Ladd’s classic book, ‘The Gospel of the Kingdom’. The teaching about the Kingdom of God in this essay is largely taken from this excellent book.

[17] Sometimes there is excited talk about Iran becoming a Christian nation. This ignores what Jesus said. Most people choose the broad road that leads to hell, only a few choose the narrow world (Matthew 7: 13 – 14). In the light of the New Testament there is no such thing as a Christian nation.

[18] ‘It comes quietly, humbly, without fire from heaven, without a blaze of glory, without a rending of the mountains or a cleaving of the skies. It comes like seed down in the earth…it can be rejected by hard hearts…But it is the Kingdom of God.’  From ‘The Gospel of the Kingdom’ by George Eldon Ladd. .

[19] From Ladd’s ‘The Gospel of the Kingdom’

[20] Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 prohibit pork.

[21] Deuteronomy 22:5, women should not wear clothes associated with men

[22] For breaking the Sabbath, (Exodus 31: 14 – 14), for blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16), worshipping false gods (Deuteronomy 13, and 27), for disobeying a parent (Deuteronomy 21), and for a bride who is not a virgin (Deuteronomy 22)

[23] It is even more problematic to make the verse apply to Iran, and Elam was a completely separate kingdom to Iran.

[24] For example, in Galatians 4 Paul uses Isaac and Ishmael to contrast the Old and New Covenants; in 1 Corinthians 10 Paul uses the crossing of the Red Sea and the time in the wilderness to illustrate stages in the individual Christian’s life; the writer of Hebrews used the image of the tabernacle to explain how the believer can enter God’s presence.