Resources that touch upon correct way to deal with occultists, servers of darkness principalities, e

Hello power used and spirit led redeemed and adopted children of God:

Would like to know if you have a favorite go to resource that outlines the different ways and attitudes one should have when dealing with persons that are in the dark side (to put it in a way), and are in one of our areas of influence.

It would be best if it distinguishes the different types:

One that was born into an occultist family and does not know better is different from one that voluntarily joined an occultist group.

Also to describe the different options:

Intercessory prayer, strategic interdiction prayer (against powers and principalities), fasting campaign, and all the way to exposing the works of the evil, deliverance ministry, etc.

Thanks ahead of time for the suggestions.

Find more posts tagged with

Pentecostal & Charismatic Products

Comments

Robyn VH.

Hi Hamilton

There is alot of junk out there on this issue - As an fresh perspective on general understanding around this type of thing Dr M Heiser Unseen Realm is highly recommended. More specific books for your query I recommend Clinton Arnold ...he was new to me and I really appreciated the insights and wisdom. Eddie Smith is the other prayer book that I keep revisiting. I have personally encountered / dealt with alot of this type of thing and the general key is HS revelation as the key to progressing with the individual ....Gods timing versus ours is imperative.

In His dust

Robyn

MJ. Smith

context:

Lost Christianity by Jacob Needleman

The Gnostic Scriptures: A New Translation with Annotations and Introductions by Layton, Bentley

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1039988#Comment_1039988

Thanks Robyn, I have many books by Eddie Smith, I have not read, I will check them.

I found nothing in Faithlife by Clinton Arnold.

True discernment and guidance by the Holy Spirit is key, I was just curious if someone has come with general principles applicable to many cases.

I do have Dr. Heiser's book. I have not finished it. I wonder if the elohim he talks about have something to do with territorial spirits.

Thanks for the recommendations.

Blessings.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040014#Comment_1040014

Hi MJ:

Thanks for the recommendations.

Started reading Lost Christianity.

So far I see the same fallacy as modern cessationists: they both eisegeize "mysticism" (in Needleman's case "Esoterism") into the Canon.

Never did Paul say (referring to the Holy Spirit): "this mystical (or esoteric) experience that we just had", so both concepts are not native to the experience in Pentecost and other instances of the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

I will continue to read the book, but in my opinion the author started with the left foot.

Kind regards.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040392#Comment_1040392

Started reading Lost Christianity.

Whether or not I agree with Needleman, he is essential contemporary reading which is why I recommended the book. I expected a bit of a clash between his presuppositions and yours.

they both eisegeize "mysticism" (in Needleman's case "Esoterism") into the Canon

I've noticed that different traditions use the terms in different ways. The canon clearly has theophanies. Is there a meaningful distinction between a mystic and a theophanic experiences? I would say no. But I always refer people to McGinn for Christian mysticism - its roots and history

Jan Krohn

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040385#Comment_1040385

I do have Dr. Heiser's book. I have not finished it. I wonder if the elohim he talks about have something to do with territorial spirits.

Yes, they do! If you finish the book, it will become very clear to you.

Robyn VH.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040385#Comment_1040385

https://www.logos.com/product/43258/3-crucial-questions-about-spiritual-warfare

also his commentary on Ephesians and the one I really want is in prepub There are also a couple of youtube .....Clinton Arnold is on the academic staff at Biola University

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040419#Comment_1040419

I've noticed that different traditions use the terms in different ways. The canon clearly has theophanies. Is there a meaningful distinction between a mystic and a theophanic experiences? I would say no. But I always refer people to McGinn for Christian mysticism - its roots and history

From what I understand God's reality is ultimate reality (real reality so to speak). Most traditions do not understand that we are the ones living in a fallen creation, an aberration, a subpar reality.

God is perfect in His natural state, and in His reality all is perfect.

So when He or a messenger shows up, Miraculous things are bound to happen because out of His love for us adopted children He straightens things up for us.

Theophanies are nothing else but The Creator God showing up in our area (as He wishes), and allowing us to perceive real reality. Nothing mystical nor esoteric about it, just plain view / perception of Ultimate Truth [Almighty God in form of Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ, or other Hypostasis).

Mysticism in my mind is associated with occult practices: in antiquity girls and guys getting stoned with fumes of different types and then having some weird experiences due to intoxication, and then saying that they speak for the gods. [utter nonsense].

Needleman talks about esoterism instead of mystical, and mentions too many times gnosis. Could he be also an occultist? would not surprise me if he is.

In the Lost Christianity book, Father Vincent had an extraordinary experience with the Spirit of God when helping the victims of the breakout to get to the other village. {nothing mystical nor esoteric about it), but just God ministering in His presence to help with the merciful event.

Now from there to say that the love of God is in Father Vincent permanently is another thing, because if the Holy Spirit is in your heart for real, you would not smoke nor drink beer. Bad stewardship of the Holy Spirit temple is not a sign of correct relation with the Creator.

Satanist and other occultist have a baptism of a spirit type experience too, and is not the real deal (at least not the Holy Spirit one), because the fruit of such event is not the one aligned with the Bible. Such type experiences I would call mystical, esoteric, gnosis type, etc.

Even within Christian groups I have heard of fake baptism of the Holy Spirt, and have heard that in one occasion, when there was an interdenominational gathering, when the Holiness Pentecostals started to pray, many of the leaders of the other groups hit the ground and started showing signs of association with wrong spirits.

Mr. Needleman asks some very interesting questions. As there are many fake groups, events and situations, by logic we can conclude that there should be the true one somewhere.

Can a persons be changed deep in the core to be more in contact with God and Christlike?

A man of God visited an aboriginal place where women walked about topless. Now a days many say that that is their way of being, that is their culture, and that we should not try to change them.

Well the man of God started to pray, and the true Holy Spirit of God fell on the aboriginals that were gathered there, surprise, surprise, the women started running covering their nakedness...

Never underestimate how low we can get when away from the Holy Spirit of God, in a fallen state (when the Holy Spirit leaves our life), really out of whack things are bound to happen, and not aligned with God's original plan for us.

Note that the lake of fire was prepared for satan and his minions, not for humans, but due to the resisting the real Holy Spirit and making up stories like we can eventually have aseity like God (which is not true), and even rejecting Jesus Christ and His offering of salvation, many are going to end up in that lake of fire.

Our will will not prevail over God's. The only way we will get back to the original perfect pre fall state, is when we understand that such is only possible when there is one will ruling: God's.

Kind regards.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040420#Comment_1040420

Thank you Jan.

So many books, so many human limitations. LOL.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040433#Comment_1040433

Hi Robyn:

Have it too, but I wish there could be executive summaries to go over it real quick. LOL. (have not read it).

What do you think of the following:

https://ebooks.faithlife.com/products/172742/he-came-to-set-the-captives-free

https://ebooks.faithlife.com/products/172775/prepare-for-war

https://ebooks.faithlife.com/products/172823/unbroken-curses-hidden-source-of-trouble-in-the-christians-life

https://ebooks.faithlife.com/products/172589/becoming-a-vessel-of-honor

Some say she is a fake, and much is not aligned with the Bible, others think she is for real.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040502#Comment_1040502

From what I understand God's reality is ultimate reality (real reality so to speak). Most traditions do not understand that we are the ones living in a fallen creation, an aberration, a subpar reality.

...

Mysticism in my mind is associated with occult practices:

Neither of the above statements reflect what I have learned through 50 years in religious studies. Those studies have led to the understanding that most of the world understands God to be "the ground of being" (or "ultimate reality"). By this I mean that the theologians/philosophers understand this and try to share this knowledge with the "common person" in a variety of ways.

Mysticism, again is spread broadly, with the understanding that it is spiritual disciplines. These spiritual disciplines are, occasionally, practiced in the occult but this is rather rare. The only cases that come to mind occur along side non-occult use of the disciplines. My understanding of the term occult requires two elements: (1) an element of magic i.e. that a human doing x can force the other side to do y and (2) an element of manipulating the dark forces - Satan, et. al. I do understand that in common parlance occult has gained a wider meaning that encompasses both the positive and negative but I find the distinction useful. If the distinction is not made then all religion is by definition occult i.e. related to the supernatural.

Basic reading for those interested in theology and religious studies 50 years ago included the following - all still in print. Some were required reading for all students. Perhaps, someone can update the list.

Otto, Rudolf. The Idea of the Holy: An Inquiry into the Non-rational Factor in the Idea of the Divine and Its Relation to the Rational
Durkheim, Emile. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life
James, William. The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature
Eliade, Mircea. The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion [several other works were popular]
Kierkegaard, Soren. Fear and Trembling
Wiesel, Elie. Night
Anonymous. The Way of the Pilgrim
Neihardt, John G. Black Elk Speaks
Jung, Carl Gustav. Man and His Symbols [several other works were popular]
Underhill, Evelyn. Mysticism
Frankl, Viktor E. Man's Search for Meaning
Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness
Hammarskjöld, Dag. Markings.
Huxley, Aldous. The Doors of Perception
Campbell, Joseph. The Hero with a Thousand Faces
Smith, Huston. The World's Religions

Books that I would consider occult and not recommend unless one has a specific reason to be informed re: the occult:

anything by Aleister Crowley
Medieval to early modern grimoire such as Sefer Raziel Ha-Malakh, Magical Treatise of Solomon, Book of Simon the Magician,Three Books of Occult Philosophy, Libro de San Cipriano . . .
anything by Johann Scheible
anything by Dion Fortune

Books that I would consider esoteric and not recommend without knowing the person very, very well i.e. it takes preparation to be able to understand and misunderstanding can have undesirable results:

anonymous. Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey into Christian Hermeticism
most books of Gershom Scholem
most perennial philosphy books e.g. Frithjof Schuon's books

allowing us to perceive real reality

This is precisely the definition of the mystical experience in most of my reading.

20th century individuals labeled "mystic" by Wikipedia that I have trouble considering "occult":

Vladimir Lossky
Dag Hammarskjöld
Bede Griffiths
Simone Weil
Thomas Merton
Anthony de Mello
Henri Nouwen
Richard Foster
Kathleen Norris
Kallistos Ware

Needleman talks about esoterism instead of mystical, and mentions too many times gnosis. Could he be also an occultist? would not surprise me if he is.

Needleman is first and foremost a Jewish philosopher, an academic who studied, among other things, new religious movements. The book you are reading is about the esoteric not the mystical as Needleman would use the terms. In Christianity, the esoteric is historically tied more to Gnosticism than to Orthodoxy ... but not exclusively.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040567#Comment_1040567

Excellent input as usual MJ, thanks for the list no. 1.

The others I do not care much about. I feel bad for occultists, if they do not change, they will end up in a very bad place. But Jesus is merciful, if He wants, He can touch them.

This is precisely the definition of the mystical experience in most of my reading.

Perceiving real reality because of the mercy of God is nothing mystical, esoteric, etc. such are artificially assigned categories not found in the Scriptures when talking about a real experience with God our Creator.

I go by what the Bible says, and it does not call experience with the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ or God (Yahweh), mystical, esoteric, gnostic, or other.

To me the eisegeszing and arbitrarily categorizing of a natural experience with God on His terms is ungodly, and in my eyes may have ulterior malign motives.

As for Needleman, just because he is a philosopher, an academic, etc. does not tell me that he is not also an occultist. If people were to write in the prolegomena that they are occultist, most true Christians would not read them. Being sincere about your allegiances is key and jibes with the nature and character of God.

Those that have dubious allegiances and keep such a secret, are not worthy of study. Eventually your presuppositions will lead you to particular conclusions that back up your real worldview.

And one does not have to be a master logistician to understand what I am trying to say about an author's allegiances and presuppositions, and the conclusions they will arrive at if starting from a wrong worldview.

Kind regards.

P.S.

John 10: ⁵And they will never follow a stranger, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers

Harris, W. H., III, Ritzema, E., Brannan, R., Mangum, D., Dunham, J., Reimer, J. A., & Wierenga, M. (Eds.). (2012). The Lexham English Bible (Jn 10:5). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

Ain't this verse beautiful? blessed be our Shepherd Jesus Christ.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040606#Comment_1040606

This is precisely the definition of the mystical experience in most of my reading.

Perceiving real reality because of the mercy of God is nothing mystical,

It is the definition of mystical in the Judeo-Christian tradition, you don't get to change the meaning of the word which has a common, world-wide, pan-religion meaning. You can say "in this context, I am using a narrow definition of "mysticism" as used by ... in order to ...". Evelyn Underhill provides a definition that is broadly accepted:

[quote]Mysticism, then, is not an opinion: it is not a philosophy. It has nothing in common with the pursuit of occult knowledge. It is not merely the power of contemplating Eternity. It is the name of that organic process which involves the perfect consummation of the Love of God: the achievement here and now of the immortal heritage of man. Or, if you like it better—for this means exactly the same thing—it is the art of establishing his conscious relation with the Absolute.

Evelyn Underhill, Mysticism: A Study in the Nature and Development of Man’s Spiritual Consciousness, Third Edition, Revised (New York: E. P. Dutton and Company, 1912), 97.

I go by what the Bible says, and it does not call experience with the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ or God (Yahweh), mystical,

Following this logic, I assume that you don't use the term "trinity", "hypostatsis", "theophany" ...

A common list of characteristics of the mystical/theophanic experience ... one that unfortunately uses "true self" terminology rather than "ground of being": (quoted from Shrader)

ineffability (inability to capture the experience in ordinary language),
noetic quality (the notion that mystical experiences reveal an otherwise hidden or inaccessible knowledge),
transiency (the simple fact that mystical experiences last for a relatively brief period of time),
passivity (the sense that mystical experiences happen to someone; that they are somehow beyond the range of human volition and control),
unity of opposites (a sense of Oneness, Wholeness or Completeness),
timelessness (a sense that mystical experiences transcend time), and
a feeling that one has somehow encountered "the true self" (a sense that mystical experiences reveal the nature of our true, cosmic self: one that is beyond life and death, beyond difference and duality, and beyond ego and selfishness).

As for Needleman, just because he is a philosopher, an academic, etc. does not tell me that he is not also an occultist

Fine, jump to conclusions OR read his 23 or so books then travel to San Francisco and ask him yourself. I believe he is still alive. Yes, I probably sound somewhat annoyed.- accusing someone of occultism with its negative connotations is not something I take lightly. I know English is not your first language - but you need to learn to use terms as they are generally used within religious studies. You get annoyed that seminary graduates do not know "homostasis"; I get annoyed when students misuse the terms mysticism, esoteric, occult ... and throw out accusations ...

As for your original question, most people involved in the occult are driven by (a) a need for power, (b) fears of their current situation, especially lack of control, or (c) lack of knowledge of alternatives - much the same things that drive people into cults. Does thinking in these terms help you find an answer to your question?

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040611#Comment_1040611

Thinking over your comments, it occurred to me that you might not be aware of the depth of mysticism in Judaism which I know primarily from conversations with a particular Jewish man rather than references I can point you to. But while Kabbalah claims a long oral history that is undocumented, the history of merkabah mysticism is embedded in scripture and in rabbinic writings. From Wikipedia:

[quote]Mark Verman has distinguished four periods in early Jewish mysticism, developing from Isaiah's and Ezekiel's visions of the Throne/Chariot, to later extant merkabah mysticism texts:

800–500 BCE, mystical elements in Prophetic Judaism such as Ezekiel's chariot
Beginning c. 530s BCE, especially 300–100 BCE, Apocalyptic literature mysticism
Beginning c. 100 BCE, especially 1–130s CE, early Rabbinic merkabah mysticism referred to briefly in exoteric Rabbinic literature such as the Pardes ascent; also related to early Christian mysticism
c. 1–200 CE, continuing till c. 1000 CE, merkabah mystical ascent accounts in the esoteric Merkabah-Hekhalot literature

The only work that I remembering reading that covered merkabah mysticism is Gershom G. Scholem's Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition. But this provides another piece of the Jewish milieu out of which Christianity emerged. I don't know how far into this sort of thing Denise's interest in 2nd Temple Judaism may have taken her, but she may well have better suggestions than I.

However, the basic search "merkabah NEAR mysticism" brings up 380 articles in 202 resources in my Logos library - some in commentaries on Pauline literature, e.g.

[quote] On the interpretation of v. 14 developed here, see further my essay, “The Triumph of God in 2 Cor. 2:14: Another Example of Merkabah Mysticism in Paul,” NTS 42 (1996), pp. 260–81. Recently, there has been a renewed interest in the Jewish mysticism of the Apostle Paul, and particularly his merkabah mysticism. For example, Alan F. Segal attempts to understand Paul as having undergone a mystical conversion similar to those found in the Jewish mystical tradition (Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee [New Haven: Yale, 1990]; see also idem, “Paul and the Beginning of Jewish Mysticism,” in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys [ed. John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane; Albany, N.Y.: SUNY Press, 1995], pp. 93–122). Martin Hengel has also focused on the merkabah experience of Paul, arguing that the apostle bears witness to an early Christian tradition based on Ps. 110:1, that the crucified Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, was raised and seated “at the right hand” of God, that is, enthroned as a co-occupant of God’s own “throne of glory” (cf. Jer. 17:12), located in the highest heaven (“ ‘Sit at My Right Hand!’ The Enthronement of Christ at the Right Hand of God and Psalm 110:1,” in Studies in Early Christology [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995], pp. 119–225). Cf. Eusebius, Demonstration of the Gospel 4.15.33, 42. All of the basic elements of merkabah mysticism are already found in the visions of God reported in the OT: Exod. 24:10–11; 1 Kgs. 22:19; Isa. 6:1–13; Ezek. 1:1–28; 3:12–13, 22–24; 8:1–18; 10:9–17; Dan. 7:9–14.

On Hab. 3:8 see M. Haran, “The Ark and the Cherubim,” IEJ 9 (1959), pp. 30–38 (esp. p. 37), 89–94; cf. also 1 Chron. 28:18 (“his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim”); the description of the “great four-faced chariot of cherubim” in the gnostic Hypostasis of the Archons [NHC II, 4, 95:13–14]; 3 En. 22:11; 24:1. The paintings in the synagogue at Dura-Europos include a picture of the throne-chariot with wheels, which seems to reflect the merkabah tradition (cf. Jonathan A. Goldstein, “The Judaism of the Synagogues [Focusing on the Synagogue of Dura-Europos],” in Judaism in Late Antiquity, Part Two: Historical Syntheses [ed. Jacob Neusner; Handbuch der Orientalistik 1.17.2; Leiden: Brill, 1995], pp. 109–57).

James M. Scott, 2 Corinthians, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011), 91.

or if you prefer John:

[quote] However, the transformation that 1 John anticipates may be likeness to God: conversing with God had a transformative effect on Moses’ face sufficient to strike awe in those who saw (Exod 34:29–35), and Paul recalls this tradition as he presents believers as those who look on the glory of the Lord and are transformed into the same likeness (2 Cor 3:18). In Phil 3:20–21 such transformation will be to the likeness of Jesus, whose work it will be at his revelation, demonstrating that precision and consistency are not to be expected in writers at this time.63 Such ideas parallel and may draw on Jewish mystical traditions whose goal was to ascend to before the divine throne, and which described the transformation of those who achieved this. Although the developed sources for this (often called Merkabah mysticism) are late, it is now widely agreed that their roots are to be found in Judaism of the late Second Temple period;64 they confirm that 1 John’s thought is to be located within a Jewish framework and not within Hellenic notions of deification or apotheosis. If ultimately the language is too allusive to reach a firm conclusion as to what lies ahead, this is only what the letter itself acknowledges: the answer is not yet revealed and will only be revealed when “he” is revealed.

Judith M. Lieu, I, II & III John: A Commentary, ed. C. Clifton Black, M. Eugene Boring, and John T. Carroll, 1st ed., The New Testament Library (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2012), 125 .

and my favorite encouragement to study broadly [quote]

For the student of ancient apocalyptic must be encouraged to acquaint himself with the later phases of the tradition. Otherwise he will not be able to perform even such necessary tasks as assessing arguments for a late date for 2 Enoch or for the Parables of Enoch, or assessing the extent of Christian editing in a work such as 3 Baruch. He will therefore have to venture into many unfamiliar areas, such as Byzantine history or Merkabah mysticism or Bogomil religion or Ethiopian Christianity, and will have to rely heavily on specialists in such areas. But this simply highlights once again the necessarily cooperative and interdisciplinary nature of peudepigraphal studies.

Richard Bauckham, The Jewish World around the New Testament: Collected Essays I, ed. Jörg Frey, vol. 233, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 120.

Hamilton Ramos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040619#Comment_1040619

MJ, thanks for the info.

and my favorite encouragement to study broadly

...

I understand the concept.

But this provides another piece of the Jewish milieu out of which Christianity emerged.

This is what I totally disagree with.

One thing is to use terms borrowed from other currents to explain concepts of a unique event / movement, and another thing is to have ties with such currents.

I will have to be plain. My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ never ever said that through a mystical / esoteric / occult manner, method, etc. would we receive the Holy Spirit that He came to baptize us with.

Any mention of mystical, esoteric, gnostic, etc. to me is a distortion of the message and mission of Jesus of restoring the koinonia of man with God by baptizing with the Holy Spirit, who was lost when the transgression happened in Eden.

So any group mentioning any of them terms (not used by Jesus) to me are way off.

I would not be surprised that Jesus clashed with the religious authorities because of that, man made constructs, that have no clue of what the Kingdom of God (Holy Spirit enthroned in our hearts) is about, sent directly by God to us Romans 5:5.

Them people in those groups amalgamated a bunch of hypothesis and set it as the way, because they self-proclaimed themselves "living Torah".

When they met the real "living Torah", not only did they miss Him, but even started a conspiracy (that showed who they really were: children of the evil one) doing what that evil one does: lie, cheat, steal, kill, etc.

For those that think that there was no conspiracy against the legit "living Torah", the Son of God Jesus, read:

Matthew 21:

33 “Hear another parable. There was a master of a house who planted a vineyard and put a fence around it and dug a winepress in it and built a tower and leased it to tenants, and went into another country.

34 When the season for fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants to get his fruit.

35And the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another, and stoned another.

36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first. And they did the same to them.

37 Finally he sent his son to them, saying, They will respect my son.

38 But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and have his inheritance.

39 And they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.

40 When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?

41 They said to him, He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.

42 Jesus said to them, Have you never read in the Scriptures:

“The stone that the builders rejected

has become the cornerstone;

this was the Lord's doing,

and it is marvelous in our eyes?

43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.

44 And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him.

45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them.

46 And although they were seeking to arrest him, they feared the crowds, because they held him to be a prophet.

See, a true prophet back then and a true person with the gift of prophecy now is not into mysticism, esoterism, occultism, gnosticism, or any of that stuff.

He / she deals with the Holy Spirit of God direct, and the Holy Sprit comes as a representative of real reality which is Jesus Christ who made all for Him.

Colossians 1:16

For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

Remember that: Jesus Christ... Living Torah, Lord, Savior, is not a mystic, not an esoteric, not a gnostic, not a magician, not anything of a human made construct, but the very founder and prefecter of the faith.

Kind regards.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040795#Comment_1040795

I will have to be plain. My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ never ever said that through a mystical / esoteric / occult manner, method, etc. would we receive the Holy Spirit that He came to baptize us with.

The Baptism of the Holy Spirit is a separate topic, not even closely related.

Remember that: Jesus Christ... Living Torah, Lord, Savior, is not a mystic, not an esoteric, not a gnostic, not a magician, not anything of a human made construct, but the very founder and prefecter of the faith.

Jesus Christ is God ... again a different topic ... although He is full god and fully man. As long as you use a private definitions of "mystic", "esoteric", "gnostic" and "magician", I will be unable to communicate clearly with you.

Best of luck

Abrie Theart

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1040385#Comment_1040385

Hi Hamilton

As far as Dr Heiser's book and specifically ( I do not know which book you are referring to) : What the Bible Really Says About the Powers of Darkness , does classify "territorial spirits"

Blessings