DEMONIZATION of COVENANT OT and NT believers

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

Understanding Demonization from a Biblical Perspective

This session aims to help us understand the concept of demonization from a biblical perspective. Contemporary theological studies present numerous questions, uncertainties, and misunderstandings regarding demonic possession, habitation, control, and influence. In this discussion, we will examine some of these aspects by presenting fundamental biblical understandings of demonic influence and possession.

At the outset, it is important to consider the term that is most commonly translated in biblical texts as “possessed by a demon.” In the original Greek, this term is δαιμονίζομαι (daimonizomai). Although traditionally rendered as “possessed by a demon,” many contemporary scholars argue that this translation is not entirely accurate. The Greek language also includes related expressions such as ἔχειν δαιμόνιον (echein daimonion – “to have a demon”) and ἔχειν πνεῦμα (echein pneuma – “to have a spirit”), which are used synonymously.

New Testament scholar Clinton Arnold, who has conducted extensive research in this area, points out that the Greek text does not contain words that denote “possession” in the sense of ownership regarding demons. Therefore, a more precise translation of δαιμονίζομαι (daimonizomai) would be “demonized” rather than “possessed by a demon.” By analogy, just as the Greek word βαπτίζω (baptizō) has been transliterated into “baptize,” δαιμονίζομαι (daimonizomai) should be understood as “demonized.” This distinction is crucial, as not every manifestation of demonic influence can be classified as full possession.

Can a Believer Be “Possessed” by a Demon?

A frequently asked question is whether a believer can be possessed by a demon. It is essential to clarify that the term “demonic possession” has been traditionally used throughout Church history without a clear distinction between believers and non-believers. Early Christian texts do not always reflect the modern understanding of demonic spiritual influence.

The key issue is how we define “possession.” Does it imply complete control? Does it entail ownership? Some argue that if a demon inhabits a person, it fully possesses them; however, this is not necessarily true.

To clarify, consider an analogy: if cockroaches infest a house, they may contaminate and damage it, but they do not own the house. Similarly, demons can exert influence over a person without necessarily “owning” them in the sense of absolute control.

Therefore, while a believer can be subject to demonic influence or control in certain areas of their life, they cannot be possessed by a demon, as they belong to Jesus Christ.

Arguments for the Possibility of a Believer Being Demonized

A widespread belief is that because every Christian is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, demons cannot coexist with Him. While this claim may appear logical, there is no explicit biblical text that supports this assertion.

For example, if we accept the argument that “the Holy Spirit cannot coexist with a demon,” we must also conclude that “the Holy Spirit cannot coexist with sin.” However, this would imply that believers cannot sin, which contradicts 1 John 1:8: “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves.”

Scripture provides examples of believers who were under demonic influence:

• King Saul (1 Samuel 9:31) – initially filled with the Holy Spirit but later demonized.
• The Daughter of Abraham (Luke 13:10–17) – bound by Satan despite being part of God’s covenant.
• Apostle Peter (Matthew 16:23) – spoke under satanic influence immediately after receiving divine revelation.
• Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5) – believers who fell under satanic influence.
• The Galatians (Galatians 3:1) – described as “bewitched,” possibly indicating demonic influence.
• The Corinthians (1 Corinthians 5) – Paul handed over a believer to Satan for discipline.

These examples illustrate that even believers can fall under varying degrees of demonic influence.

Spiritual Gateways to Demonic Influence

Ephesians 4:27 warns: “Do not give the devil a foothold.” The Greek word τόπος (topos) means “place” or “territory,” suggesting that believers can open a “door” to demonic influence in their lives.

Factors that may lead to demonic influence include:

• Unforgiveness and bitterness
• Depression, fear, and guilt
• Physical affliction and occult practices
• Habitual sin and addictions
• False spiritual guidance (deceptive revelations, dreams, prophecies)
• Spiritual passivity
• Traumatic experiences (abuse, sexual violations)
• Curses and occult connections

Degrees of Demonic Influence

Demonic influence does not manifest suddenly but follows a progressive pattern:

1. Erroneous thoughts → lead to
2. Erroneous imaginations →
3. Erroneous actions →
4. Sinful habits →
5. Loss of sensitivity to the Holy Spirit →
6. Risk of demonic deception →
7. Risk of possession →
8. Demonic control.

This does not mean that every case of influence leads to full possession. In most instances, deliverance is achieved through repentance and spiritual restoration rather than exorcism.

Conclusion

Distinguishing between demonic influence and possession is essential. Believers cannot be possessed by demons but can be influenced by them. The biblical response to demonic influence is repentance, sanctification, and spiritual vigilance.

DEMONIZATION of COVENANT OT and NT Believers

Greetings, this is Dr. Paul King. I am sharing with you the third installment in a series of responses to Mark Bernard’s critique of Rob Reimer and Soul Care’s perspectives on the demonization of Christians. This segment focuses on addressing factual inaccuracies rather than theological or exegetical issues, aiming to clarify these matters before delving into deeper doctrinal discussions. In this series, I aim to provide a thorough examination of Mark Bernard’s claims, particularly his assertion that the idea of Covenant Believers being equivalent to Spirit-indwelt Believers is fundamentally flawed. This is a complex issue that requires careful consideration of historical, logical, and theological contexts. To begin, it is essential to recognize that this debate is not unique to Rob Reimer or Soul Care but is part of a broader theological discourse within orthodox Christian belief.

Factual Clarifications and Historical Context

Mark Bernard’s critique often conflates factual inaccuracies with theological disagreements. For instance, he claims that the notion of Covenant Believers being equal to Spirit-indwelt Believers is inherently flawed. However, this perspective overlooks the historical and theological nuances within orthodox Christianity. Early Alliance theologians, such as George Pardington, a PhD scholar in Old Testament Semitic studies, argued that Old Testament saints were regenerated by the Spirit, a view supported by New Testament passages like John 3:5 and Luke 13:28. Similarly, Martin Lloyd-Jones, a respected Welsh Reformed theologian, affirmed that the Holy Spirit was present in all Old Testament saints, including Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Baptist covenant theology also supports the idea that salvation was possible under the Old Covenant through the Covenant of Grace, provided individuals had saving faith in God’s promises. John Piper, a Reformed Baptist theologian, further emphasizes that the Abrahamic Covenant and the New Covenant are part of a single Covenant of Grace, where God’s promises are received through faith. These examples illustrate that the debate over the equivalence of Covenant and Spirit-indwelt Believers is not a novel or fringe perspective but is rooted in orthodox Christian theology.

Addressing Imbalanced Christology

Another claim made by Mark Bernard is that Rob Reimer teaches an imbalanced Christology, particularly regarding Jesus’ humanity. Bernard argues that Reimer overemphasizes Jesus’ humanity, suggesting that Believers can perform the same miracles Jesus did by relying on the Holy Spirit. However, this critique fails to acknowledge the orthodox understanding of kenosis (Christ’s self-emptying) and the role of the Holy Spirit in Jesus’ earthly ministry.

Alliance theology, as articulated by A.B. Simpson and A.W. Tozer, maintains that Jesus voluntarily limited the exercise of His divine powers during His earthly ministry, relying entirely on the Holy Spirit to perform miracles. This view is consistent with orthodox Christian doctrine, which affirms that Jesus remained fully God while also being fully human. Simpson and Tozer both emphasized that Jesus’ miracles were performed not through His deity but through His Spirit-anointed humanity, a model for Believers to follow.

The Role of Baptism and Exorcism in Early Christianity

Mark Bernard also critiques the practice of exorcism among Believers, citing Dr. Oscar Scarzone, a Lutheran theologian, who argues that early Christian exorcism was primarily a pre-baptismal practice and that demonization does not occur in baptized Believers. While Scarzone’s findings are based on Lutheran theology, which views baptism as a protective seal against demonic influence, this perspective is not universally accepted within Christianity.

Early church fathers, such as Hippolytus, documented extensive pre-baptismal exorcism rituals, including daily exorcisms leading up to baptism. These practices were seen as both diagnostic and prophylactic, aimed at ensuring the candidate was free from demonic influence before receiving baptism. However, the effectiveness of these exorcisms was contingent upon the individual’s ongoing faith and obedience. Church fathers like Cyprian and the authors of the Apostolic Constitutions acknowledged that demons could return if a baptized Believer fell into sin or failed in faith.

The Continuity of Deliverance Ministry in Church History

Contrary to Mark Bernard’s assertion that the belief in demonization among Believers is limited to the Alliance, Deliverance Ministry has a long history across various Christian traditions. Figures like John Wesley, the Methodist revivalist, and Johann Blumhardt, a Lutheran pastor, documented cases of demonization among Believers and practiced deliverance as part of their ministry. More recently, scholars like Clinton Arnold and Ed Murphy have provided biblical and theological support for the reality of demonization among Christians, emphasizing the need for spiritual warfare and deliverance.

Exegetical Evidence for Deliverance Ministry

Bernard claims that there is no biblical support for the idea that Jesus delivered demons from Jews and God-fearing Gentiles, and therefore, Christians cannot have indwelling demons. However, this argument ignores the continuity of Jesus’ ministry as described in the Gospels and Acts. Jesus’ commands to His disciples to cast out demons (Matthew 10:8, Mark 16:17) and the ongoing ministry of the early church (Acts 5:16, 8:7) demonstrate that deliverance is a valid and necessary aspect of Christian ministry.

Furthermore, the case of the daughter of Abraham in Luke 13:10-17 illustrates that Jesus delivered a Covenant Believer from demonic bondage. Similarly, the demonized child of a Covenant Believer in Mark 9:14-29 shows that even children of faithful Believers can be affected by demonic forces. These examples, along with the broader biblical narrative, provide substantial support for the belief that Christians can experience demonization and require deliverance.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Mark Bernard’s critique of Rob Reimer and Soul Care’s teachings on demonization reflects a limited understanding of the historical, theological, and exegetical foundations of this issue. The belief in the demonization of Believers is not a fringe or modern innovation but is deeply rooted in orthodox Christian theology and practice. By examining the historical context, theological nuances, and biblical evidence, it becomes clear that deliverance ministry is a legitimate and necessary aspect of Christian discipleship. As we continue this series, we will delve deeper into the exegetical and doctrinal issues surrounding this topic, seeking to provide a comprehensive and biblically sound response to these critiques.

Heavenly Father, we pray for wisdom and discernment as we engage with these complex issues. May Your truth guide us, and may we be instruments of Your healing and deliverance in the lives of those who are bound by darkness. In Jesus’ name, amen. God bless you, and I look forward to continuing this discussion in the next installment.