On the Supernatural: Framing Our Response
Image
Read the series.
Christians have a broad range of attitudes toward the “supernatural” in society—mostly in fiction, film, and gaming. To hark back to the 70’s and 80’s, many Christians were concerned about Ouija boards, 8-balls, Dungeons and Dragons, and the symbology of the traditional card deck. That expanded to various heavy metal rock groups and “backward masking.”
In more recent memory, the Harry Potter series of novels and movies was controversial among Christians. I haven’t noticed an uproar about Wicked and Wicked: For Good, but I’m sure disagreements exist. Movies, streaming content, and novels of concern abound.
How are we to evaluate and respond to these cultural phenomena as followers of Christ, who seek to be “not conformed to this world” (Rom 12:2) and also to be “salt” and “light” to those around us? (Matt 5:13-16).
The Church has also long struggled with another question, equally important—though often overlooked: How do we fulfil the creative image of God in our work and in our artistic output? We are here to be holy and influential but also to be properly and fully human, vehicles of His glory as image-bearers.
The big question of Christians’ relationship to culture, and church relationship to culture, is beyond the scope of this article (Christ over culture? Christ in culture? Some other model?). But it’s important to include our call to be creative and contribute to human thriving as one of the tensions as we try to respond biblically to how our culture interacts with unseen realities and fictions.
Points of Agreement & Disagreement
Christians agree that the Devil and his spiritual minions are real and that they are top-tier enemies of God and His Church. We also agree that he and his are not to be worshiped or served in any way. Further, we agree that we should be wary of anything that increases our vulnerability to the Enemy’s influence.
From there, disagreement multiplies. We should avoid worshiping, serving, or increasing vulnerability to the Enemy, but what actually does those things?
We differ a lot also in attitude and emphasis. How important is “the occult” relative to other dangers and influences?
Attitude and emphasis arise directly from convictions—conscious or not—about how Satan really works and what the supernatural realm is really like. With that in mind, I have focused in this series mainly on those, often assumed, convictions.
After a survey of some systematic theologies on demonology and cosmology, I challenged the categories of “natural” and “supernatural” as we tend to think of them in the modern and post-modern West. The Bible presents reality as full of both visible and invisible features everywhere and all the time. In that sense, “the supernatural” is not all that special.
Later, I aimed to confront two common errors: (a) naturalistic secularization, where we don’t take the unseen realities as “really real” enough, and (b) a kind of spooked, superstitious attitude, based mainly on common knowledge and folklore.
These are both counter-biblical ways of looking at the unseen realities of the creation.
My aim in this article is to tie up some admittedly miscellaneous loose ends closer to the practical theology. The prior three articles are context.
Here are the main points:
- It is possible to worship something to a degree with incomplete awareness and intention, though this worship is mitigated by ignorance.
- Satan’s primary tool is deception and his primary process is ideas and words. In Scripture, objects associated with Satan are not depicted as powerful.
- Satan’s primary goal is idolatry.
- Our attitude toward “supernatural” and “occult” features in culture should consist of sobriety and vigilance, not being spooked.
- We should always bear in mind that our own flesh (sarx, not exactly “body”), is closer, more constant, and offers more spiritual “attack surfaces” than externals like fiction, film, games, or occultic objects.
Let’s consider these one at a time.
Worship: Knowing and Unknowing
If some element of our culture has demonic origins or occultic purposes in the past (or obscure present), could a Christian—by using it in some way—unknowingly offer worship to Satan or demons? Can items used that way carry evil spiritual influence?
1 Corinthians 10 is helpful:
Consider the people of Israel: are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar? 19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? … (1 Co 10:18–22)
The apostle is clear that an idol is not really “anything,” and that food previously used in an offering to one is not really “anything” either (cf. 1 Cor 8:4-5). But, at the same time, we learn that participating in idolatrous feasts was more than it might seem. Regardless of intent, it was, objectively, a spiritual participation with demons. It carried meaning independent of intent.
We do well to remember, though, that worship in the fullest sense, is a thing humans do “in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24).
1 Corinthians 8-10, together with other passages argues that believers should be alert to the possibility that participation in cultural events could have more significance than we intend. But the passage argues against the notion that objects used in demonic worship can convey spiritual influence.
Satan’s Modus Operandi
Jesus’ direct teaching on how the Devil works is fundamental.
You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. (Jn 8:44)
Jesus first characterizes the Devil as “a murderer,” but everything after that focuses on his character as a deceiver. Consider also Revelation 12:9, the events of Genesis 3, and 2 Corinthians 11:3.
The implication is that Satan’s method is to get humans to believe things that are not true. Even in his role as tempter, he relies heavily on communication of untruths (see Matt 4:1-11) as well as appeals to the desires of fallen minds and bodies (James 1:14).
Occultic symbols that carry no meaning to an observer are not deceiving, because they aren’t communicating anything. Even if the observer knows what the symbols mean, it doesn’t follow that deception is ocurring. You can read Mein Kampf without the slightest risk of becoming a neo-Nazi. Similarly, Satan speaks in familiar language to Jesus during the temptation in Matthew 4 (Luke 4, Mark 1), but Jesus is not at risk of being deceived.
I’m not about to populate my shelves with objects covered in occultic symbols. But the reasons for that are aesthetic, not protective. I would not be in danger of absorbing evil influence. If I could read the symbols, there might be some increased vulnerability there, but Christians are far more at risk of deception through Satanic communication that is subtle.
A study of phrases like “be not deceived” in Scripture rarely references Satan and never references occultic symbols. This is because we’re so often ready to deceive ourselves (e.g., James 1:22) or to believe lies and half-truths from sources we find appealing (2 Tim 3:13-14, 4:3-4).
Satan’s Idolatrous Goal
Though the scene in Eden doesn’t include a call to bow down before the serpent, there is a clear strategy to replace devotion to God with devotion to something else (self). And even in the temptation of Jesus, the Devil does not content himself with trying to disqualify Jesus from His mission. He directly calls on Him to bow (Matt 4:9). Further, Paul directly links worship of idols to worship of demons (1 Co 10:20).
This is important, because any study of what is actually “demonic,” has to deal adequately with the overall narrative of the Bible, which is one of constant falling into idolatry of one sort or another.
Evaluating supernatural elements in culture involves asking if we’re participating in something that carries more meaning than we intend, asking if we are likely to be deceived, but also asking if we’re likely to have our devotion to God pulled toward some competing object.
Our Attitude
There are tensions we need to preserve in our attitude and emphasis regarding the unseen forces of evil.
Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. (1 Pe 5:8)
Though fear has a place in our motivations and attitudes as believers (e.g., 1 Pet 1:17) we’re never told to be afraid of the rulers of the darkness of this age (Eph 6:12), meaning Satan and his servants. Rather, the key words are sobriety and alertness, along with a diligence to be “armored” spiritually (Eph 6:13-18).
Superstition and feeling spooked—common attitudes in non-Christian folklore—are not in view. More to the point, mindfulness of Satan’s primary goals and methods is in view. The Scriptures tell us where our sobermindedness and alertness need to be aimed.
The Flesh
The classic formula of “the world, the flesh, and the Devil” as the enemies of the Christian holds up well to biblical scrutiny.
Looking again at the temptation of Jesus, Satan tries to tap ordinary human weakness, physical appetites, and (in Jesus’ case, non-existent) human aversions to God’s authority and supremacy.
We could all cloister ourselves and never see a novel with witches in it or a movie with demons in it. We could sing only Psalms, a cappella, to tunes with all quarter notes (to avoid questions about rhythm). We could avoid games and decorative or ritual objects entirely.
To add a first century context, we could eat only the food we hunted or grew ourselves.
We’d still have what is, by far, the largest and most present vulnerability to Satan’s influence (if he even needs to put in any effort): our own flesh. The word “flesh” has some different meanings, depending on the context, but these are clear enough:
- Romans 13:14
- 1 Corinthians 3:1
- Galatians 5:13
- Galatians 5:17
- Galatians 5:24
- Colossians 2:23
- 1 Peter 2:11
- 1 John 2:16
When we consider the increasing interest in “the supernatural” we’re seeing in Western culture, we do need to consider factors like meaning, influence, deception, devotion, and self indulgence. If we can be influenced by objects, spells, historic associations of obscure symbols, etc., the Bible certainly does not emphasize these in the array of threats we face.
I conclude with a benediction that seems apt:
The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. (Ro 16:20)
Aaron Blumer 2016 Bio
Aaron Blumer is a Michigan native and graduate of Bob Jones University and Central Baptist Theological Seminary (Plymouth, MN). He and his family live in small-town western Wisconsin, not far from where he pastored for thirteen years. In his full time job, he is content manager for a law-enforcement digital library service. (Views expressed are the author's own and not his employer's, church's, etc.)
As for this…
The things we moderns call occult are like an appendix to his main playbook,
I already supported that. That statement is a summary of most of that post.
Scripture provides several key passages that show that your statement and the argumentation for it are not biblically sound because they do not account for important biblical data.
Case #1 - Demonic Opposition to God and His Leaders in the Exodus from Egypt
Undeniably, the Exodus from Egypt is one of the most important events and works of God in Scripture. What does the Spirit highlight about the role of demonic activities in the Exodus?
To my knowledge, there is not a single statement in Scripture about Egyptian idolaters and Egyptian idolatrous priests playing any role in opposing God's deliverance of His people from their bondage in Egypt.
By striking contrast, the Spirit explicitly and repeatedly directs profound attention to the activities of professional Egyptian occultists who openly and repeatedly sought to oppose God's working through Moses and Aaron in their repeated encounters with Pharaoh in which God demanded that Pharaoh let His people go:
Exod. 7:11 Then Pharaoh also called the wise men and the sorcerers: now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments.
Exod. 7:22 And the magicians of Egypt did so with their enchantments: and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, neither did he hearken unto them; as the LORD had said.
Exod. 8:7 And the magicians did so with their enchantments, and brought up frogs upon the land of Egypt.
Exod. 8:18 And the magicians did so with their enchantments to bring forth lice, but they could not: so there were lice upon man, and upon beast.
Exod. 8:19 Then the magicians said unto Pharaoh, This is the finger of God: and Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD had said.
Exod. 9:11 And the magicians could not stand before Moses because of the boils; for the boil was upon the magicians, and upon all the Egyptians.
The explicit biblical statements about the activities of the professional occultists of Egypt in seeking to oppose God's deliverance of His people does not at all support the view that occult magicians and enchantments were "like an appendix to his [Satan's] main playbook" in his opposition to God and His people in the events of the Exodus.
The inspired accounts of the Exodus show that occultists and occult activities were at the forefront of the working of Satan and his demons in that seminally important biblical event.
The inspired accounts of the Exodus show that occultists and occult activities were at the forefront of the working of Satan and his demons in that seminally important biblical event.
This is true, but it doesn’t support your view.
- When I talk about things moderns associate with ‘occult’ being an appendix to Satan’s playbook, this is a view based on the entire Bible, not a couple of isolated events where it plays a key role in the narrative.
- The purpose of the series of plagues leading up to the Exodus was to expose the weakness of the gods of Egypt and vanity of idolatry. It was God taking back an aspect of His glory from rival “deities.”
12 For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am the Lord. (Ex 12:12)
11 Now I know that the Lord is greater than all gods, because in this affair they dealt arrogantly with the people.” (Ex 18:11)
4 while the Egyptians were burying all their firstborn, whom the Lord had struck down among them. On their gods also the Lord executed judgments. (Nu 33:4)
In addition, God repeatedly depicts the events of the plagues as a kind of teaching tool, to reveal the truth about where the power really resides and what is truly glorious.
For example…
4 And I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and he will pursue them, and I will get glory over Pharaoh and all his host, and the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord.” And they did so. (Ex 14:4)
This theme appears also in Exodus 7:5, 7:17, 8:10, 8:22, 9:14, 9:29, 10:2, 14:4, 14:18.
Some have also noted the alignment of the plagues with known Egyptian gods: E.g., the Nile was supposed to be under the power of Hapi. Frogs would have been been the domain of Heqet, and the sun was as seen as the power of Ra, etc.
One Bible dictionary sums up this way…
In the book of Exodus, Yahweh demonstrates that the gods of Egypt—the greatest political and military power of the time—were empty nothings. He demonstrates His total control over all the aspects of the physical world that the Egyptians thought were the province of “the gods of Egypt.” He shows that the supposed gods of the Nile, sun, and wind have no real power (compare Zevit, “Three Ways to Look at the Ten Plagues”; Silverman, “Divinities and Deities in Ancient Egypt”). The Egyptian gods couldn’t even help the Egyptians prevail against slaves, and they couldn’t control the aspects of nature they were supposed to be connected with.
Stuart, Douglas. “Exodus, Book of.” Ed. John D. Barry et al. The Lexham Bible Dictionary 2016: n. pag. Print.
So, the strongest support for my point about Satan’s main thing in the world is the whole of the Bible, especially passages I’ve listed multiple times now about deceit, false, doctrine, etc. But as for the particular example of the Exodus, it is entirely consistent with the idea that idolatry and demons and sorcery were closely linked:
17 They sacrificed to demons that were no gods, to gods they had never known, to new gods that had come recently, whom your fathers had never dreaded. (Dt 32:17)
Also, as I’ve noted before, 1 Cor 10:19-20 — Paul directly said idolatry really was demon worship.
19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons. (1 Co 10:19–20)
I don’t have time to do the study right now but it would be interesting to find out if the various flavors of sorcery and divination are also directly tied to demons (and therefore, idolatry) somewhere. I would not be surprised at all if they were, because the contexts where sorcerers are doing their thing is usually (maybe always) a false religion context, and all the false religion of the day was polytheistic—gods, demons.
But I’m forgetting why that particular question even matters. I mean, it’s pretty interesting in its own right. But if we suppose for the sake of argument that the forbidden practices of sorcery, witchcraft, necromancy, and the like in Scripture have nothing at all to do with any false religion and are in no way linked to idolatry, what would that prove?
If sorcery etc. is a totally unique thing in every way, it still…
- doesn’t prove the folks in Acts 19 burned the books because they were afraid of the power the books were infused with.
- doesn’t prove that objects can carry power in themselves.
- doesn’t disprove that idolatry/false worship are Satan’s main goal in the world
- doesn’t disprove that Satan’s main strategy is deception
I suppose a completely non-religious concept of ‘occult’ in Acts would narrow the possible motivations of the book burners there, but it raises so many other interpretive problems. The biggest of these, though, is why would ‘occult’ even be wrong if it’s not part of false religion and not in any way demonic? And if it’s completely nonreligious and nondemonic, why would objects connected with occult have any power or be in any way important?
Edit to add (there is solid evidence that the ‘sorcerers’ in Exodus were religious figures, priests, and that their exercise of power was strongly linked to their religious system). https://israelmyglory.org/article/casting-down-serpents/ But, again, this is an interesting rabbit trail relative to the article and its argument. (But it really is quite interesting, so thanks for that, Rajesh—I say that without irony).
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Aaron, thanks for this article. I think you do well to point out that false teaching is the devil’s method, not power in objects.
A point of disagreement: in the article, you interpret 1 Cor 8-10 as Paul saying that the idols are nothing. Yes, Paul taught that idols were nothing. But not in the sense the [strong]* used that phrase.
Paul meant that they are nothing to us so we should destroy/forsake (Acts 19:26-27) and flee from them (1 Cor 10:14).
When Paul finished his long argument against eating in the temple, he knew there would be an objection: v19 “What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?”
The objector wants the nothingness of the idol confirmed. But Paul doesn’t. v20 (“No” is added in ESV.) “[On the contrary], I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God.“ The offering is real, as the weak said.
The [strong] were wrong to be strong. Thus, vv21-22 You [are not strong to] drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You [are not strong to] partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?
I still agree with your distinction between teaching and power-in-objects. The meat had no power. But eating of a sacrifice does “proclaim” (1 Cor 11:26). Eating was a statement about the relationship you want with the sacrifice/false god.
* I put [strong] in brackets because Paul doesn’t call them strong.
Bert Perry: In fact, in Acts 19:19, the word "periergos" (Strong's 4021) is actually translated in 1 Timothy 5:13 as "busybody"--which is probably a better literalistic translation of the Greek, IMO, "working all around".
I think you’re close. The affix peri can be used to mean “to go around” I think these should be “work avoiders” and “work avoiding.” The cynics earned this description with their habit of living like dogs(avoiding work) while forcing their philosophical/spiritual help on others and expecting payment.
This is true, but it doesn’t support your view.
- When I talk about things moderns associate with ‘occult’ being an appendix to Satan’s playbook, this is a view based on the entire Bible, not a couple of isolated events where it plays a key role in the narrative.
It is not just "a couple of isolated events." You have tried to dismiss the NT passages that I have already presented, but that does not work. Those passages are not just describing people who do certain things.
As for the Exodus, I anticipated that you would go the idolatry route by trying to foreground it instead of what the Spirit foregrounds--the occult activities of occultists. As for your evidence that they were idolatrous priests, that is not what the passages say. The Spirit could have highlighted that they were priests who were praying to their god for success, but that is not what the texts say.
I suppose a completely non-religious concept of ‘occult’ in Acts would narrow the possible motivations of the book burners there, but it raises so many other interpretive problems. The biggest of these, though, is why would ‘occult’ even be wrong if it’s not part of false religion and not in any way demonic? And if it’s completely nonreligious and nondemonic, why would objects connected with occult have any power or be in any way important?
I have made no claims that the occult is "nondemonic." I have no idea where you got that notion. I plainly said the following:
The inspired accounts of the Exodus show that occultists and occult activities were at the forefront of the working of Satan and his demons in that seminally important biblical event. [bold added to my original statement]
Human reasoning makes statements like the following: "The things we moderns call occult are like an appendix to his [Satan's] main playbook."
Divine wisdom does not say any such thing.
The Holy Spirit deemed it necessary and profitable to distinguish repeatedly between idolatry and the occult in the NT.
Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Revelation 9:20 And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk: 21 Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
Revelation 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.
Revelation 22:15 For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.
God deemed it necessary and profitable to specify explicitly and repeatedly that sorcerers would experience fearful, eternal consequences for such sinfulness.
The passages treated above do not support holding that being a sorcerer is theologically reducible to being an idolater.
What God has deemed necessary and profitable to say to us explicitly and repeatedly must be treated with the utmost seriousness and care.
Paul meant that they are nothing to us so we should destroy/forsake (Acts 19:26-27) and flee from them (1 Cor 10:14).
I haven’t studied that specific question, but seems plausible.
You have tried to dismiss the NT passages that I have already presented, but that does not work. Those passages are not just describing people who do certain things.
No, I didn’t dismiss it. I pointed out what is not there and offered an explanation of the text based on what is there (with support from several other passages and the context also).
I have made no claims that the occult is “nondemonic.” I have no idea where you got that notion. I plainly said the following:
OK. I don’t remember where I got it either. I certainly might have “swapped a variable.” I do it a lot. So probably I confused the “not idolatry” assertion with the “not of demons” assertion. So it is the link to idolatry and religion that you specifically reject?
Though we’re told in the epistles that idolatry (of the polytheistic sort in the context) is demon worship, it doesn’t necessary follow that demon worship is idolatry. Not from that fact alone, anyway. But we have other obvious reasons to draw that conclusion: worshiping anything but God is idolatry.
Human reasoning makes statements like the following: “The things we moderns call occult are like an appendix to his [Satan’s] main playbook.”
Yes. I am a human, and I reasoned. That’s not a counterargument.
Divine wisdom does not say any such thing.
I’ve shown that the Bible teaches this. Are you saying the Bible is not divine wisdom?
Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
This actually supports my point, as do the other passages. Because there are other things in that list, the list argues that “occult” is not all that special. Count the items in those lists: there are more “not occult” items than there are “occult” items.
God deemed it necessary and profitable to specify explicitly and repeatedly that sorcerers would experience fearful, eternal consequences for such sinfulness.
Yes, along with all the not-sorcerers included in those passages.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[RG]Divine wisdom does not say any such thing.
[AB]I’ve shown that the Bible teaches this. Are you saying the Bible is not divine wisdom?
Of course, the Bible is divine wisdom. You say that the Bible teaches "this." I say that it does not.
Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, 20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
[AB]This actually supports my point, as do the other passages. Because there are other things in that list, the list argues that “occult” is not all that special. Count the items in those lists: there are more “not occult” items than there are “occult” items.
No, it does not support your point because it does not show that the occult is a mere "appendix" in Satan's playbook; it is put on equal footing with idolatry in all of the passages. Furthermore, by these texts explicitly speaking of idolatry and the occult separately, we know with certainty that the Spirit does not want us to conflate the two or subsume the occult under idolatry as if idolatry were the foreground and the occult is a mere blip on the radar in demonic activity.
I have never made the claim that these passages show that the occult is "all that special." What I have repeatedly said is that the Bible does not teach that the occult is the same thing as idolatry and that it is a mere "appendix" . . .
[RG]God deemed it necessary and profitable to specify explicitly and repeatedly that sorcerers would experience fearful, eternal consequences for such sinfulness.
[AB]Yes, along with all the not-sorcerers included in those passages.
I have never claimed that the other things in those passages were minor or lesser, etc. What I categorically reject is that they show that the occult is some minor or lesser aspect of the activities of Satan and his demons in the world.
God stresses that those who engage in occult activities and never repent will be condemned eternally. What the Bible teaches about the occult therefore must be treated with the utmost seriousness and care.
In Genesis 3:4 the serpent(being possessed by Satan) tempts Eve to sin by lying to her. I also note that in John 8:44, our Lord Jesus describes the devil as both a murderer, and a liar, additionally our Lord describes him as not just a liar, but the father of lies in that same verse. In 2 Cor. 11:14, The Apostle Paul tells us that Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
Given that Satan is a deceiver and a liar first and foremost based on these passages, it is obvious that occultism is one of Satan’s tools in order to deceive. But he does use other means to deceive as well.
Some questions I have for you are:
Do you believe that occultism is the primary and prevalent means that he uses to deceive? I am aware of the verses you have posted, but I would like you to explain why these verses drive you to the conclusions that you have reached. In other words, what is your exegetical reasoning that convinced you of your position as you studied God’s Word on this subject? That has always seemed to me to be missing from your posts, and I would greatly appreciate some clarification or explanation.
Another question I have for you is that do you believe that any event in which the devil is appearing is inherently occultic, simply by virtue of him participating in that event? I ask because there are times in the Scripture in which Satan doesn’t appear to be using any occultic methods to deceive, yet some could call it occultic simply by virtue of him possessing the serpent in order to deceive Eve. Any clarification and explanation of your views and thoughts on these matters is appreciated. Thank you.
I do note that Aaron has asked(twice) several questions that ou do not seem to have answered. I too am curious about your answers to those questions.
Jeremy,
Here are some brief responses to your comments.
Do you believe that occultism is the primary and prevalent means that he uses to deceive?
To my knowledge, the Bible does not directly speak to the question of what Satan's "primary and prevalent means [is] that he uses to deceive." Both idolatry and the occult are extremely important in that regard. I am not at the point in my understanding of these subjects to affirm one way or another what I believe is "the primary and prevalent means."
I am aware of the verses you have posted, but I would like you to explain why these verses drive you to the conclusions that you have reached. In other words, what is your exegetical reasoning that convinced you of your position as you studied God’s Word on this subject? That has always seemed to me to be missing from your posts, and I would greatly appreciate some clarification or explanation.
I think that I have explained repeatedly what I see as the importance of those verses. Again, those verses do not support the view that idolatry and the occult are to be conflated or that the occult is merely "an appendix . . ." These passages and others teach that the occult is distinct from idolatry and a very important aspect of demonic opposition to God in the world.
Another question I have for you is that do you believe that any event in which the devil is appearing is inherently occultic, simply by virtue of him participating in that event? I ask because there are times in the Scripture in which Satan doesn’t appear to be using any occultic methods to deceive, yet some could call it occultic simply by virtue of him possessing the serpent in order to deceive Eve. Any clarification and explanation of your views and thoughts on these matters is appreciated. Thank you.
This is an interesting question that I will have to think about and research. My initial and unstudied response is to say that I do not believe that the Bible would support that view, but further study might (?) lead me to affirm that view.
I do note that Aaron has asked(twice) several questions that ou do not seem to have answered. I too am curious about your answers to those questions.
It is very challenging to meaningfully engage with someone on a subject that I believe is very important when numerous truth claims and questions are being set forth at the same time. Also, many questions cannot be easily answered and would require very extensive presentation and discussion of biblical evidence for my views about those questions.
I have compiled at least 80 verses in Scripture about the occult and have been studying those for quite a number of years now. Perhaps your examining them for yourself might help in answering some of your own questions.
More later, DV, as time permits.
Scripture certainly teaches that the ancient Babylonians were idolaters (Dan. 3, etc.). In a key prophetic passage about God's then-future judgment of ancient Babylon, however, God profoundly stressed that His judgment on ancient Babylon would be because of the immense prevalence of human involvement in occult practices:
Isaiah 47:8 Therefore hear now this, thou that art given to pleasures, that dwellest carelessly, that sayest in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me; I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children:
9 But these two things shall come to thee in a moment in one day, the loss of children, and widowhood: they shall come upon thee in their perfection for the multitude of thy sorceries, and for the great abundance of thine enchantments.
10 For thou hast trusted in thy wickedness: thou hast said, None seeth me. Thy wisdom and thy knowledge, it hath perverted thee; and thou hast said in thine heart, I am, and none else beside me.
11 Therefore shall evil come upon thee; thou shalt not know from whence it riseth: and mischief shall fall upon thee; thou shalt not be able to put it off: and desolation shall come upon thee suddenly, which thou shalt not know.
12 Stand now with thine enchantments, and with the multitude of thy sorceries, wherein thou hast laboured from thy youth; if so be thou shalt be able to profit, if so be thou mayest prevail.
13 Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee.
14 Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it.
15 Thus shall they be unto thee with whom thou hast laboured, even thy merchants, from thy youth: they shall wander every one to his quarter; none shall save thee.
Plainly, this passage does not support the view that the occult was "like an appendix to his [Satan's] main playbook" in his nefarious activities in ancient Babylon. Rather, God profoundly emphasized in this prophetic revelation that His judgment on Babylon would be because of her shocking occult character.
Where does the Bible speak of occult use of items crafted from wood and stone?
What else would physical items be crafted from? I even mentioned in my post that I felt the wood and stone principle would also apply to other natural materials. I don't see why items crafted from plant fiber or animal skins would have power that wood and stone do not have. After all, idols can be crafted using wood, stone, fabric, and leather as well as occult items.
What else would physical items be crafted from? I even mentioned in my post that I felt the wood and stone principle would also apply to other natural materials. I don't see why items crafted from plant fiber or animal skins would have power that wood and stone do not have. After all, idols can be crafted using wood, stone, fabric, and leather as well as occult items.
I have already addressed the notion of whether items have power by saying that I have not made any claims one way or the other about that point. Again, I have neither asserted that items can have power nor have I denied that they can have power.
Again, idolatry and the occult are not the same thing.
It is noteworthy that Acts 19 speaks explicitly of God's doing special miracles through physical materials: handkerchiefs or aprons. I do not know of any biblical reason that the same could not apply to demonic use of physical objects in a similar manner.
Plainly, this passage does not support the view that the occult was "like an appendix to his [Satan's] main playbook" in his nefarious activities in ancient Babylon. Rather, God profoundly emphasized in this prophetic revelation that His judgment on Babylon would be because of her shocking occult character.
Yes, Isaiah 47 speaks of occult practices in Babylon, but what do we see in the previous three chapters before Isaiah 47? Isaiah 44:9-19 speaks of the folly of creating idols. Isaiah 45:16 says, "They shall be ashamed, and also confounded, all of them: they shall go to confusion together that are makers of idols." Isaiah 46:6-7 says, "They lavish gold out of the bag, and weigh silver in the balance, and hire a goldsmith; and he maketh it a god: they fall down, yea, they worship. They bear him upon the shoulder, they carry him, and set him in his place, and he standeth; from his place shall he not remove: yea, one shall cry unto him, yet can he not answer, nor save him out of his trouble."
The emphasis in these chapters from Isaiah is much more on idolatry than it is on the occult. The Exodus has been mentioned in this thread. Yes, the Egyptians practiced sorcery, but the emphasis in regards to the Israelites was on idolatry. Ezekiel 20:6-9 says,
6 In the day that I lifted up mine hand unto them, to bring them forth of the land of Egypt into a land that I had espied for them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the glory of all lands:
7 Then said I unto them, Cast ye away every man the abominations of his eyes, and defile not yourselves with the idols of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.
8 But they rebelled against me, and would not hearken unto me: they did not every man cast away the abominations of their eyes, neither did they forsake the idols of Egypt: then I said, I will pour out my fury upon them, to accomplish my anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.
During the wilderness wanderings, God's chastisement was against their idolatry more than it was against occult practices. Ezekiel 20:15-16 says,
15 Yet also I lifted up my hand unto them in the wilderness, that I would not bring them into the land which I had given them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the glory of all lands;
16 Because they despised my judgments, and walked not in my statutes, but polluted my sabbaths: for their heart went after their idols.
In the New Testament, when Paul talks about the children of Israel in 1 Cor 10: 7, he says, "Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play." This was idolatrous eating, idolatrous drinking and idolatrous playing. If we look at the totality of Scripture, we see idolatry being promoted by Satan much more than we see occult practices.
I have already addressed the notion of whether items have power by saying that I have not made any claims one way or the other about that point. Again, I have neither asserted that items can have power nor have I denied that they can have power.
But you have presented rebuttals against those who assert that items have no power, even though explicit Biblical support exists for that position. Presenting a rebuttal makes one think you hold an opposing position.
Again, idolatry and the occult are not the same thing.
Again, no one has said that they are exactly the same. The differences, however, do not make a difference in regards to the power discussion. If you think they do, please explain why.
It is noteworthy that Acts 19 speaks explicitly of God's doing special miracles through physical materials: handkerchiefs or aprons. I do not know of any biblical reason that the same could not apply to demonic use of physical objects in a similar manner.
I've already mentioned that situation in this thread and I pointed out that the verses explicitly say that this situation was a "special miracle" that God had wrought. I don't think that lets us assume demons can imbue physical objects with miraculous powers.
Yes, Isaiah 47 speaks of occult practices in Babylon, but what do we see in the previous three chapters before Isaiah 47?
Isaiah 47 does not just speak of occultic practices. It explicitly says that God's judgment of ancient Babylon was because of the immense prevalence of their occult practices. What God says would bring His judgment on that empire cannot be relegated to being "an appendix to his [Satan's] main playbook." Divine wisdom explicitly highlights profoundly abundant occult practices as what brought God's judgment--that shows that the occult character of Babylon was at the forefront of why God judged that empire.
But you have presented rebuttals against those who assert that items have no power, even though explicit Biblical support exists for that position.
Because those who have made those assertions have invalidly used passages about idols and idolatry to make claims about the occult.
[RG]Again, idolatry and the occult are not the same thing.
[KM]Again, no one has said that they are exactly the same. The differences, however, do not make a difference in regards to the power discussion. If you think they do, please explain why.
You assert that they do not make a difference in regards to the power discussion, but you have no evidence to support your assertion. Do you know comprehensively what is and isn't true about occult objects and practices when God has not provided that comprehensive information anywhere in Scripture? If so, where and how did you get that information?
[RG]It is noteworthy that Acts 19 speaks explicitly of God's doing special miracles through physical materials: handkerchiefs or aprons. I do not know of any biblical reason that the same could not apply to demonic use of physical objects in a similar manner.
[KM]I've already mentioned that situation in this thread and I pointed out that the verses explicitly say that this situation was a "special miracle" that God had wrought. I don't think that lets us assume demons can imbue physical objects with miraculous powers.
You cannot just assume something about what God permits demons to do, especially to disobedient Christians who refuse to submit to Him by their dabbling with things of the occult. Paul even speaks of delivering sinful believers over to Satan; Christians who choose to disobey God's prohibitions against the occult risk chastisement through God's allowing demons to oppress them and do even more to them. Do you have any Bible basis for saying that God does not allow demons to afflict disobedient Christians who dabble with the occult by allowing demonic oppression through those occult objects?
If we look at the totality of Scripture, we see idolatry being promoted by Satan much more than we see occult practices.
Whether or not this is a true assessment of the totality of the biblical data, I have already provided definitive evidence to disprove the notion that the occult is "an appendix to his [Satan's] main playbook."
Isaiah 47 does not just speak of occultic practices. It explicitly says that God's judgment of ancient Babylon was because of the immense prevalence of their occult practices. What God says would bring His judgment on that empire cannot be relegated to being "an appendix to his [Satan's] main playbook." Divine wisdom explicitly highlights profoundly abundant occult practices as what brought God's judgment--that shows that the occult character of Babylon was at the forefront of why God judged that empire.
So, occultism wasn't an appendix in regards to God's treatment of Babylon. So what? Do Satan's dealings with Babylon constitute his main playbook? Of course not. Satan has a bigger playbook than just Babylon.
[Kevin]If we look at the totality of Scripture, we see idolatry being promoted by Satan much more than we see occult practices.
[Rajesh]Whether or not this is a true assessment of the totality of the biblical data, I have already provided definitive evidence to disprove the notion that the occult is "an appendix to his [Satan's] main playbook."
Whether or not? Do you even doubt that this is a true assessment? If this is a true assessment, which it is, then that definitively shows that occultism doesn't have as large a place in Satan's playbook as what idolatry has.
Because those who have made those assertions have invalidly used passages about idols and idolatry to make claims about the occult.
I presented a biblical principle regarding crafted items that are used in activities that have demonic connections. You have given me no biblical evidence why that biblical principle would not apply to both idolatry and the occult.
You assert that they do not make a difference in regards to the power discussion, but you have no evidence to support your assertion.
My evidence is in the biblical principle I presented. If you disagree with that biblical principle, please tell me why I should accept your assertions instead of accepting the biblical principle.
Do you know comprehensively what is and isn't true about occult objects and practices when God has not provided that comprehensive information anywhere in Scripture? If so, where and how did you get that information?
I never claimed that my information was comprehensive. I simply passed along a biblical principle about crafted objects that is clearly seen in Scripture.
You cannot just assume something about what God permits demons to do, especially to disobedient Christians who refuse to submit to Him by their dabbling with things of the occult.
You mean like your assumption that Satan could oppress people through objects? What biblical evidence do you have to support that as being a possibility? Satan doesn't need an object to oppress people.
You mean like your assumption that Satan could oppress people through objects? What biblical evidence do you have to support that as being a possibility? Satan doesn't need an object to oppress people.
I have not assumed anything. I have steadfastly refused to rule it out as a possibility because I do not believe that there is any biblical evidence that requires us to do so.
It is true that Satan does not need an object to oppress people. That does not establish anything about his never using objects as a means of demonic enticement, etc.
I have already called attention to a striking, explicit NT account where things of the occult were treated in a way that the NT does not call attention to things of idolatry being treated. You have not provided any evidence that rules out that the reason that those new believers burned the magic books was (or included) that retaining those books would have given the devil a place in the lives of believers that God did not want the devil to have.
The NT highlights how the Thessalonians turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God but neither in Acts 17 (where we are told of Paul's ministry in Thessalonica) nor anywhere else in the NT are we given any information about their destroying their idols publicly and counting the total value of the idols that they destroyed.
By striking contrast, the Spirit directly calls our attention in Acts 19 to how newly converted believers in Ephesus who were former occultists publicly burned their books. The Spirit's distinctiveness in how He has chosen to portray what believers did shortly after their conversion between those who had been idolaters and those who had been occultists must be explained.
Saying these things, I am not claiming that the former idolaters who became believers that the NT calls our attention to did not destroy their idols. What I am pointing out is that the Spirit has not called our attention to any of them that did do so.
My treatment of the account in Acts 19 is evidence that NT believers regarded things of the occult differently than they regarded things of idolatry.
I have not assumed anything. I have steadfastly refused to rule it out as a possibility.
OK, I'll acknowledge the existence of a remote possibility due to the inability to rule anything out. We can't rule out that Satan oppresses us through sunshine or through snow or that angels dance on the heads of pins. There's a big difference between a remote theoretical possibility and something we need to warn people about because that's the way we see Satan working.
It is true that Satan does not need an object to oppress people. That does not establish anything about his never using objects as a means of demonic enticement, etc.
I've already acknowledged the harm of demonic enticement earlier in the thread. We were talking about the word "deleterious" and I was asking you what the harm might be in having the occult objects. I said, 'I can see the harm in the items being a "temptation prod," but I'm not sure if that's the full extent of the "power/spiritual influence/deleterious quality" that you consider an object to be able to have.' At the time, I was considering the idea of power and spiritual influence and deleterious qualities to be generally synonymous, but I see from further discussion that you weren't saying an item had power when you said it had harmful qualities. Is the "temptation prod" quality the deleterious quality you had been talking about earlier in the thread? To me, the fact that an item can be a temptation is not an inherent quality within an item itself but rather the product of Satan working his deceit within a human mind.
I have already called attention to a striking, explicit NT account where things of the occult were treated in a way that the NT does not call attention to things of idolatry being treated.
But the Old Testament certainly points to things of idolatry being treated that way. Deut 7:5 says, "But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. During the Golden Calf Incident, Exodus 32: 20 says, "And he took the calf which they had made, and burnt it in the fire." 2 Kings 23:4 tells us what King Josiah did. "And the king commanded Hilkiah the high priest, and the priests of the second order, and the keepers of the door, to bring forth out of the temple of the Lord all the vessels that were made for Baal, and for the grove, and for all the host of heaven: and he burned them without Jerusalem in the fields of Kidron, and carried the ashes of them unto Bethel." Burning is definitely a biblical way to destroy things, so it makes sense that the people would burn occult items as well.
You have not provided any evidence that rules out that the reason that those new believers burned the magic books was (or included) that retaining those books would have given the devil a place in the lives of believers that God did not want the devil to have.
What do you mean by "a place in the lives of believers"? Wouldn't that "place" be an activity of Satan within the mind of a believer rather than a quality of an object itself? As I said earlier in the thread, "I'm in full agreement that God didn't want those items to be in their possession, but I don't see where you are getting the notion that the items themselves must have had some deleterious qualities." Unless, of course, the deleterious quality is that the object would be temptation, but that's not really an inherent quality of an object.
The NT highlights how the Thessalonians turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God but neither in Acts 17 (where we are told of Paul's ministry in Thessalonica) nor anywhere else in the NT are we given any information about their destroying their idols publicly and counting the total value of the idols that they destroyed.
Since you brought up this passage again, I figure I can ask some questions about occult objects that I asked earlier in the thread that you haven't gotten to yet. I wrote:
Since the passage explicitly states that the believers calculated the cost of the items, do you understand that accounting to be something believers today need to do when they get rid of items that God doesn't want them to have? Is that part of the passage informational, to show how great of a testimony they were presenting, or is it instructional, to show us we need to be doing the same counting today?
OK, I'll acknowledge the existence of a remote possibility due to the inability to rule anything out. We can't rule out that Satan oppresses us through sunshine or through snow or that angels dance on the heads of pins. There's a big difference between a remote theoretical possibility and something we need to warn people about because that's the way we see Satan working.
There is zero objective biblical basis to be making any dogmatic assertions about what is or is not a remote possibility or what is or is not true about the details and specifics of many occult activities that are talked about in Scripture because God has not revealed any specifics or details about many occult practices that are named in Scripture. In fact, He in His perfect wisdom has not even defined what those things were/are and yet He still categorically prohibited them and even demanded of His OT people that they execute any who practiced those activities in their midst.
I can’t really keep up the pace of posts in this thread, I think.
So, kind of randomly…
I have compiled at least 80 verses in Scripture about the occult and have been studying those for quite a number of years now. Perhaps your examining them for yourself might help in answering some of your own questions.
These are all passages I’ve read and studied as well.
None of them disprove this, the main idea of the article:
When we consider the increasing interest in “the supernatural” we’re seeing in Western culture, we do need to consider factors like meaning, influence, deception, devotion, and self indulgence. If we can be influenced by objects, spells, historic associations of obscure symbols, etc., the Bible certainly does not emphasize these in the array of threats we face.
Nor do these passages identify the activities as belonging in a single category. As I’ve shown, ‘occult’ is a modern concept. In the Bible, we do not find things grouped into ‘occult’ and ‘not occult.’ It’s a concept imposed from outside of Scripture. (One might say it’s “human wisdom.”)
What we do find is Satan and those who serve him and their activities, both human and angelic; the strategies Satan uses (there is really very little ambiguity on that point: he mainly lies); and his goals (again, clearly to draw worship away from God to substitutes). We find various forms of false religion including efforts by humans to tap into power or knowledge that is not approved by God for their use (witchcraft, sorcery, astrology, etc.).
As for Acts 19… these facts remain:
- It says “a number of” not “all of.”
- It says “their books”—they were burning their own books.
- It does not say the books had any power. (I already hear the protest, but no, this is a fact. It is not said in the text.)
- We are not told what their thought process was.
- v.20 says “So,” linking the whole sequence of events to the advance and triumph of the “word of the Lord.”
- 1 Cor 10:19 and 8:4-6 still exist.
- Acts 2:44-45 exists.
About #6 and #7: 1 Corinthians argues against the idea that objects have power and argues that worship of ‘gods’ in idol form is worship of demons. Acts 2:44ff shows believers responding to a problem in a particular way, just like Acts 19 shows believers responding to a problem in a particular way. Their actions are reported. Other passages are needed to establish whether what’s reported is supposed to be emulated and if so, how we emulate it in situations that are not identical.
In short, a report is not a command.
Add to #6 passages I listed earlier that mock the notion of objects having power.
Add to #4 several features of the context I’ve noted that suggest their actions were an expression of their rejection of their old religion (or if you prefer, ‘set of beliefs and ways connected thereto’).
I suppose also under #4, the fact that the sorcerers in Exodus were priests of their idolatrous religion.
Well, I could go on, but I’m just re-summarizing myself.
The Bible is pretty clear about what Satan is up to in the world and how he mainly operates. It’s also pretty clear about the connection between Satan, demons, idolatry, and practices connected with them. Ultimately, what makes divination, necromancy, sorcery and the like wrong is that they are, like eating the forbidden fruit in Eden, efforts to gain knowledge and power independently of God. They are fundamentally idolatrous in that they reject submission to God and dependence on God, replacing them with some God substitute—sometimes literally a god or demon, sometimes a more complex effort to throne self. Regardless, whatever we put on that throne is functioning as an idol.
Arguably, the Thessalonian’s response to the gospel is the same response of all true believers…
For they themselves report concerning us the kind of reception we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, 10 and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come. (1 Th 1:9–10)
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
There is zero objective biblical basis to be making any dogmatic assertions about what is or is not a remote possibility or what is or is not true about the details and specifics of many occult activities that are talked about in Scripture because God has not revealed any specifics or details about many occult practices that are named in Scripture. In fact, He in His perfect wisdom has not even defined what those things were/are and yet He still categorically prohibited them and even demanded of His OT people that they execute any who practiced those activities in their midst.
This whole paragraph is gobbledygook. You refer to "many occult activities that are mentioned in Scripture." Yes, there are many. But then you say, "God has not revealed any specifics or details" about them. That's not true. There are quite a few details that we can use to determine whether something that is done today is similar to what was done in Bible times and was prohibited. You say, "He in His perfect wisdom has not even defined what those things were/are." That's only partially true. We have the Hebrew words that were used, but there can be differences in understanding what the specific terms may have meant and how they would be applied to us today. You say there is "zero objective biblical basis to be making dogmatic assertions," yet you are making a dogmatic assertion that God prohibits things without giving any details or specifics of the things He prohibits.
I can’t really keep up the pace of posts in this thread, I think.
Don't worry. I take big breaks in episodes of posting.
This whole paragraph is gobbledygook. You refer to "many occult activities that are mentioned in Scripture." Yes, there are many. But then you say, "God has not revealed any specifics or details" about them. That's not true. There are quite a few details that we can use to determine whether something that is done today is similar to what was done in Bible times and was prohibited.
Hmm. Ok, here's a test case. The Bible speaks several times of occult enchantments. God categorically forbids them.
Explain exactly all the details that you know about what those were in Bible times.
For example, what specifically were the enchantments that the Egyptian magicians used to oppose God, Moses, and Aaron?
Then provide directly from Scripture how you know all this exact and specific information about them.
For example, did they use potions as part of their enchantments? Did they leap up and down as part of their enchantments? Did they cut themselves as part of their enchantments? Did they have special cloths that had been dipped in human blood that they used in their enchantments? Did they play music as part of their enchantments?
Finally, show from Scripture how you know what modern practices are identical to them and how you know that is true.
If you are not able to answer these questions, are your assertions that I have quoted above really true?
Hmm. Ok, here's a test case. The Bible speaks several times of occult enchantments. God categorically forbids them.
Explain exactly all the details that you know about what those were in Bible times.
For example, what specifically were the enchantments that the Egyptian magicians used to oppose God, Moses, and Aaron?
Then provide directly from Scripture how you know all this exact and specific information about them.
Based upon their use in Exodus 7 and following, they seemed to be the calling upon of a deity to affect the natural world. God was going to be using the miraculous nature of the plagues to show the Egyptians who had the ultimate power. Exodus 7:5 says, "And the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord, when I stretch forth mine hand upon Egypt, and bring out the children of Israel from among them." Exodus 7:10 says, "Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh, and before his servants, and it became a serpent." Verses 11-12 say, "now the magicians of Egypt, they also did in like manner with their enchantments. For they cast down every man his rod, and they became serpents." So this enchantment included an imitation of a godly action, and since the word enchantment includes the idea of chanting, I think it's safe to assume that words of some kind were spoken in their attempt to affect nature. That's all the description we have and it would be going beyond Scripture to imagine they did anything else. In this instance, God even allowed the demonic powers behind their deities to actually change the rods to serpents, but then Aaron's serpent ate them all.
For example, did they use potions as part of their enchantments? Did they leap up and down as part of their enchantments? Did they cut themselves as part of their enchantments? Did they have special cloths that had been dipped in human blood that they used in their enchantments? Did they play music as part of their enchantments?
The Bible doesn't tell us that they did any of those things during the plagues, so we can't assume that they did. Perhaps other people did those things during other enchantments, but I don't think there is any biblical record of that happening. It's enough for us to know that God does not want us calling on powers other than Him to affect the natural world, no matter what means or actions are used alongside the calling. We see that the Egyptian magicians used their rods in the same way that Aaron had, so we can't really say that a rod is an occult object just because it was used by an occultist during an occult activity. As we see here, sometimes occultist use the same objects and activities of godly people while directing those activities toward the wrong source of power.
We have enough details about occult activities to know that prohibitions are mainly directed against looking to a false source for power or information.
"Based upon their use in Exodus 7 and following, they seemed to be the calling upon of a deity to affect the natural world."
I've been reading the Bible through with intense desire, prayer, and carefulness every year for 36 years and never once thought that what the magicians were doing was "the calling upon of a deity to affect the natural world." Having said that, my Christian experience does not by itself falsify that claim.
In addition, as far as I can remember, I have never heard anyone even suggest that was what happened.
I have to wonder whether the overall trajectory of the views opposing mine on this thread have influenced you to try to bring some kind of idolatry into a passage that does not even hint at it in any way that I or many others have ever seen.
I have to wonder whether the overall trajectory of the views opposing mine on this thread have influenced you to try to bring some kind of idolatry into a passage that does not even hint at it in any way that I or many others have ever seen.
It's definitely not just the views on this thread that have shaped that have shaped my perspective. I've been a Christian for over 55 years, grew up in a Christian home, graduated from a Baptist Bible college, and I've never seen such a wide distinction as you're trying to make between idolatry and the occult.
Here's an article about cats in Egypt. https://www.history.com/articles/cats-ancient-egypt
Cats were seen as living embodiments of their gods. The animals themselves weren't worshipped, but they were kept for "contact with the gods" reasons, and they were associated with fertility and protection. A person in the article is quoted as saying “Sekhmet was a lioness goddess who was a warrior and protector deity who kept at bay the enemies of the sun god Ra (also spelled “Re”) and who also kept away illness and sickness.” Cats were mummified and placed in tombs for protection in the afterlife. Now, these gods that the cats represented were not actually gods but were demons, and they were expected to be affecting nature. So were cats, alive or mummified, idolatrous objects or occult objects. I don't see the point of making a big distinction in that regard.
I’ve been reading the Bible through with intense desire, prayer, and carefulness every year for 36 years and never once thought that what the magicians were doing was “the calling upon of a deity to affect the natural world.” Having said that, my Christian experience does not by itself falsify that claim.
In addition, as far as I can remember, I have never heard anyone even suggest that was what happened.
This is widely known, and probably for a long time. One reason is that there is abundant evidence in Exodus that the whole sequence was mostly about God exposing the weakness of the Egyptian religion: its gods and powers. Given that beliefs about ‘how to do magic’ are almost always (always?) subsets of various religions, it’s what the reader would expect. But expected or not, the evidence is there.
I went into a sample of it here: https://sharperiron.org/comment/137680#comment-137680
See also: https://israelmyglory.org/article/casting-down-serpents/
Randal Price identifies at least some of his sources, if not all of them. The link between ‘magic’ in Egypt and religious practice (therefore idolatry) in Egypt has ancient sources behind it as well as more recent ones.
But once again I want to note that we are deep in a rabbit hole. Even if the Egyptian sorcerers were somehow doing that in connection with their idolatrous false religion, it doesn’t weigh much against my thesis.
But I’m still scratching my head about what your view is on that point. If, as you’ve said, the ‘occult’ practices are Satanic, how can they not be religious? How can they not be idolatrous? One could point out all that there isn’t a verse that says so (but there is at least one, and I’ve referenced it multiple times: 1 Cor 10.20) but you don’t need a verse for what a necessary inference. If a practice is directly Satanic, how can it fail to be part of a set of beliefs and practices on all the same topics that every religion is about? So what I’m saying is that unless these practices are completely random and have a completely random relationship to Satan, they are of necessity religious and idolatrous. I can’t see any way it makes any sense to affirm that X is Satanic but X is not religious or idolatrous. But more to the point I think, in this context, what is rejecting their idolatrous and religious nature supposed to prove?
Even if every single case of sorcery in the Bible is somehow not at all religious or idolatrous, what would that prove? It would still be far from demonstrating that objects and symbols, for example, can be imbued with supernatural power.
(Edit to note: Torah.com, an apparently non-Christian source, has an interesting article about ancient Egyptian magic: Heka was apparently sort of the George Lucas/StarWars idea of ‘The Force’ but also had connections to a deity called Heka. And also found a lot more. I’ll tuck it into a dropdown… so it’s less bulky?)
Data table on the religious nature of ancient Egyptian magic
Gods and Goddesses Associated with Heka, the Ancient Egyptian Power of Magic (Assembled by Claude AI)
| God/Goddess | Relationship to Heka | Source with URL |
|---|---|---|
| Heka (deity) | God of magic itself; personification of the cosmic force | World History Encyclopedia - “Magic in Ancient Egypt” Wikipedia - “Heka (god)” |
| Heka (deity) | Present at/before creation; existed “before duality had yet come into being” (Coffin Texts, spell 261) | Wikipedia - “Heka (god)” Encyclopedia.com - “Magic in Egyptian Religion” |
| Heka (deity) | Never had major temples; no cult following or formal worship despite being pervasive | Eugene Finnegan Bible Project Ancient Origins - “The Magic of Heka” |
| Heka (deity) | Depicted in human form, dressed like a pharaoh, holding staff with twisted serpents | Study.com - “Heka, the Ancient Egyptian God” |
| Atum | Creator god who created Heka first of all his creations to protect what he ordained (Egyptian Coffin Texts) | Encyclopedia.com - “Magic in Egyptian Religion” |
| Atum | Heka said to have been created at beginning of time by creator Atum | Wikipedia - “Heka (god)” |
| Ra (Re) | In Heliopolis tradition, Heka considered son of Ra; Ra called upon Heka as source of power to begin creation | Study.com - “Heka, the Ancient Egyptian God” |
| Isis | Titled “Weret Hekau” (Great Lady of Magic); Hekau is heka in plural form | Wikipedia - “Heka (god)” Egypt Fun Tours |
| Isis | Master practitioner who used Heka to trick Ra (learning his true name), resurrect Osiris, protect Horus | Egypt Fun Tours |
| Thoth | God of wisdom/writing who wrote the sacred magical texts himself | Egypt Fun Tours |
| Thoth | Hieroglyphs (Medju-Netjer/”Words of God”) were inherently magical; as their inventor, Thoth was ultimate patron of all ritualists | Egypt Fun Tours |
| Thoth | When lector-priest read from sacred papyrus, he was acting as Thoth on earth, speaking creation into effect | Egypt Fun Tours |
| Werethekau (Weret Hekau as goddess) | “Great of Magic” - originally epithet applied to multiple goddesses, later goddess in her own right | Ancient Origins - “The Magic of Heka” |
| Werethekau | Usually shown in cobra form; foster-mother to divine kings; power immanent in royal crowns | Ancient Origins - “The Magic of Heka” |
| Werethekau | Snake-shaped wands used by magicians probably represent her | Ancient Origins - “The Magic of Heka” Wikipedia - “Heka (god)” |
| Menhet | Lion goddess, mother of Heka in the “triad of Latopolis” (Upper Egypt) | Study.com - “Heka, the Ancient Egyptian God” |
| Khnum | Water god, father of Heka in the “triad of Latopolis” (Upper Egypt) | Study.com - “Heka, the Ancient Egyptian God” |
Key Points: Egyptian Magic as Religious Practice
| Claim | Source with URL |
|---|---|
| Ancient Egyptians thought of magic (ḥeka) as a cosmic force that could be used by humans or the gods | TheTorah.com - “The Magicians Khamwaset and Meryra” |
| Magicians were “people who, through their wisdom, had the ability to harness that power and use it to cast spells, grant healing and protection, and perform other magical rites with serious real-world effects” | TheTorah.com - “The Magicians Khamwaset and Meryra” |
| The stories of Egyptian magicians “would have been plausible to ancient Egyptian readers” because magic was understood as real cosmic power | TheTorah.com - “The Magicians Khamwaset and Meryra” |
| “Magic infused every aspect of ancient Egyptian life and was ‘as much a matter of course as sleep or the preparation of food’ ” (James Henry Breasted) | World History Encyclopedia - “Magic in Ancient Egypt” |
| “Magic sustained the world daily, magic healed when one was sick, gave when one had nothing, & assured one of eternal life after death” | World History Encyclopedia - “Magic in Ancient Egypt” |
Note: Different Egyptian cities/regions had different theological traditions about Heka’s parentage - either son of Ra (Heliopolis tradition) or son of Khnum and Menhet (Latopolis/Upper Egypt tradition).
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Aaron: If, as you’ve said, the ‘occult’ practices are Satanic, how can they not be religious? How can they not be idolatrous? One could point out all that there isn’t a verse that says so (but there is at least one, and I’ve referenced it multiple times: 1 Cor 10.20) but you don’t need a verse for what a necessary inference.
Maybe you don't need a verse, but we still have one. Paul is probably quoting Deut. 32.
1 Cor 10:20 “No, I imply that what [they] sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be participants with demons.”
ἃ θύουσιν δαιμονίοις καὶ οὐ θεῷ θύουσιν
Deut 32:17 “They sacrificed to demons that were not God, [KJV: "They sacrificed unto devils, not to God"] to gods they had never known, to new gods that had come recently, whom your fathers had never dreaded.”
LXX: θύουσιν δαιμονίοις καὶ οὐ θεῷ
Romans 14 relates to meat possibly tainted by idolatry. (It's a longish argument why, but it's good.)
Some (strong) believe to eat all things (including what is possibly offered)--Paul says that's fine. IF meat retained "power" from it's offering that could "go out of it" like Paul's hankie or Jesus' kanaph, then you better avoid it--so the strong would be wrong.
Paul takes the same approach in 1 Cor 10:23-30. In scenarios (he names 2) where you don't know the idolatry status of the meat, he says, "Go ahead; don't ask questions; it doesn't matter."
But if someone tells you, "This is sacred-offered," then don't eat it.
-----
It's easy to reconcile these if we understand it this way:
Choosing to eat, touch, (whatever the culture says is the way to respect the supernatural involved) is an understanding-based act of faith in ideas.
It's a calling out for help to some god or demon or spiritual power or whatever you call it.
So reaching and touching Jesus' Kanaph was a step of faith (was she thinking of Malachi 4:2?). Jesus' Kanaph had power because she reached for it in faith and seeking the power of Jesus.
In Corinth, the (offered, but not known as offered) meat has no intrinsic power. When someone mentions its status, "This is sacred-offered," then it has power because people choose it seeking the power of it's god.
In Corinth, the (offered, but not known as offered) meat has no intrinsic power. When someone mentions its status, "This is sacred-offered," then it has power because people choose it seeking the power of it's god.
These sentences are interesting semantically since I was wondering earlier in the thread what is the meaning of "power." I don't think you are saying that as soon as the sacred-offered status is mentioned, the meat get imbued with the power of a demon. I think you are meaning it more in line with a "temptation prod" power in which the temptation is that which has power. However, some people ate the meat without seeking the god's power. They simply felt eating it had no consequences. So another power definition you just made me think of is a "consequence power." So I see the choice to eat is what has the consequence power. The meat wouldn't be gaining a power, but the choice to eat it has the power to put one in fellowship with demons. Does this make sense?
1 Cor 10:31 and James 1:14-15 seem relevant. As does 2 Tim. 1:7.
It’s fair enough to say that if I think of something in a particular way, I may give it a kind of power over me. Most of the time, we don’t need a lot of precision with the concept.
For example, there’s a lot of leftover chocolate around here from Christmas gatherings. The chocolate has some ‘power’ arguably, because it’s attractive to me. But this is because I have an appetite for it. If there was leftover chopped liver (there isn’t!), it would lack that allure.
So, conversationally, we say things like “chocolate is powerful.” Fair enough.
When we’re talking about theology though, and seeking clarity on how the created world and we ourselves function, precision is better.
The chocolate doesn’t really have any power. The power lies in my appetite and my attitude. If I develop a strong enough conviction that eating those leftovers is bad for me, defeats my weight goals, or whatever, that firm belief could pretty much dilute my appetite out of existence.
But it’s confusing to talk about objects of human belief and desire as having power. It’s really beings with desires that have the power.
Mark 7 comes to mind as well…
15 There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him.” 17 And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. 18 And he said to them, “Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, 19 since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.) 20 And he said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. 21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. 23 All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.” (Mk 7:15–23)
Jesus does not seem to have believed in objects of power.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Chocolate... Aaron, as you've told it, that's not what I'm talking about.
Dan Miller: When someone mentions its status, "This is sacred-offered," then it has power because people choose it seeking the power of it's god.
(Especially the bolded has raised concerns.)
I get why that was controversial. My point is that it has spiritual ability.
In the course of the dinner described in 1 Cor 10:23-30, when someone says, "This is sacred-offered," what does he mean?
In my experience, this type of statement comes from someone in the religion or believing in the superstition. So, the meaning is:
"This was offered to Asclepius, god of health, eat it and it will bless your health."
--> Eating it becomes a way of aligning with and appealing to the demonic spiritual power being associated with it.
"Remember, Jesus said, 'This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.'”
--> Eating it is the way we align with His sacrifice and appeal to it and to Him for our forgiveness. By eating it in that setting, we proclaim the Lord's death was for me.
ok -chocolate. It's still about the message and meaning, not the item. So, if I said, "This is my chocolate. Whoever eats it, I will give them a punch in the face. Then when someone eats it, he has, asked for a punch in the face."
[Aaron Blumer] But I’m still scratching my head about what your view is on that point. If, as you’ve said, the ‘occult’ practices are Satanic, how can they not be religious? How can they not be idolatrous?
You have provided no explanation for why inspired revelation repeatedly distinguishes between idolatry and the occult. It should be very plain that the Holy Spirit knows perfectly what He is talking about and has chosen for our profit to speak separately of both.
Based on the Spirit's repeatedly and explicitly distinguishing between the two, we learn that distinguishing between the two is right and essential for sound doctrine.
Furthermore, applying passages such as 1 Cor. 8-10 to the occult is not biblical because what Paul is dealing with there is idolatry and not the occult.
Rajesh: Acts 19:19 ... books .. burned them ... fifty thousand pieces of silver.
...shows that they regarded these ... had to be destroyed, ... they were regarded as occult objects that had deleterious qualities ... necessitated ... destruction.
Aaron(Article): Occultic symbols that carry no meaning to an observer are not deceiving, because they aren’t communicating anything. Even if the observer knows what the symbols mean, it doesn’t follow that deception is ocurring. You can read Mein Kampf without the slightest risk of becoming a neo-Nazi. Similarly, Satan speaks in familiar language to Jesus during the temptation in Matthew 4 (Luke 4, Mark 1), but Jesus is not at risk of being deceived.
I’m not about to populate my shelves with objects covered in occultic symbols. But the reasons for that are aesthetic, not protective. I would not be in danger of absorbing evil influence.
Aaron and Rajesh, in these quotes, you both seem to say that the only danger in view is inherent qualities of (or maybe attached to) the object.
Aaron, I also would not want to populate my shelves with occultic objects. But not because of the inherent dangers. Because: 1) I hate them. 2) Someone could visit and believe I honor them. That's a real danger in parts of the world.
Rajesh, there are other explanations for the destruction of those books in Acts 19. Clearly they themselves wanted to abandon those occult books and their knowledge. No doubt they wanted that knowledge to die out, not get passed on to others.
Rajesh, there are other explanations for the destruction of those books in Acts 19. Clearly they themselves wanted to abandon those occult books and their knowledge. No doubt they wanted that knowledge to die out, not get passed on to others.
Dan, of course they wanted to abandon them. That is so obviously plain in what they did, and I did not say anything to the contrary.
In fact, here is more of what I have said about them:
I get that you said that. But I don’t agree.
Your middle paragraph, about selling and using the proceeds for good, means passing on false religion to others. Maybe they couldn’t stomach that.
Your last paragraph, about washing the books and using the materials for good purposes is interesting. Where can I read about this being done in first century?
I get that you said that. But I don’t agree.
Your middle paragraph, about selling and using the proceeds for good, means passing on false religion to others. Maybe they couldn’t stomach that.
What do you not agree with?
Your comment about my middle paragraph is irrelevant to my point. Regardless of why they did not do it, the fact stands that they could have sold them for money, etc, but did not do so, as the believers did in Acts 2.
Your last paragraph, about washing the books and using the materials for good purposes is interesting. Where can I read about this being done in first century?
I have not done any research on the subject per se. Given the nature of the materials, it seems to me to be a viable possibility that the materials from which a book was made could be reused to make another written document of some sort.
I also would not want to populate my shelves with occultic objects. But not because of the inherent dangers. Because: 1) I hate them
Finally, someone has brought out something along the lines of what I would have thought would have (and should have) come up much sooner.
The most important consideration about occult objects is not whether they have qualities (intrinsic or otherwise) that make them deleterious to humans--regardless of how those deleterious qualities are understood.
The most important consideration of all concerning any and all objects is whether God hates those objects and therefore those objects must be destroyed by those whose sentiments properly reflect those of the living and true God.
You have provided no explanation for why inspired revelation repeatedly distinguishes between idolatry and the occult. It should be very plain that the Holy Spirit knows perfectly what He is talking about and has chosen for our profit to speak separately of both.
There have been multiple acknowledgments in this thread that there are differences between idolatry and the occult. No one has said that they are exactly the same. What we are trying to find out from you is why you think the differences make any difference in regards to the subject of this thread. Since, as you say, the inspired revelation has repeatedly distinguished between the two, you should easily be able to tell us why the differences matter. Is there no overlap whatsoever between the two? That's what you seem to be presenting when you so adamantly declare that "distinguishing between the two is right and essential for sound doctrine."
What is it specifically about the occult that distinguishes it from idolatry? Is it just the fact that different words have been used in lists for different sins? Is that really it? When we ask you for specifics, you say, "God has not revealed any specifics or details about many occult practices that are named in Scripture." Well, if you believe that, then how do you really know that the occult practices are all that different from idolatry, other than seeing that different terms are used?
People have repeatedly shown you in this thread that similarities exist in the Bible between idolatry and occult practices. I'm not sure you have yet acknowledged that any similarities exist. Even the lists of sins you have quoted have emphasized similarity rather than distinction. Galatians 5:19 lists a bunch of sins as the works of the flesh. The point of that list is not to draw distinctions between witchcraft and idolatry but to show that both are in the same category. The Bible explicitly puts the two as parallel to each other in 1 Samuel 15:23 "For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the Lord, he hath also rejected thee from being king."
This verse talks about rebellion, witchcraft, stubbornness, iniquity, and idolatry, but it isn't teaching us to draw distinctions between those five. All of them are a rejection of the word of the Lord. A person can't say that rebellion and stubbornness are small sins, but witchcraft and idolatry are big ones. Drawing distinctions between any of them is uncalled for.
One of the similarities mentioned earlier in the thread is that both idolatry and the occult can use crafted items. The explicit principle about crafted items is regarding idolatry, but I see no biblical reason why this principle would not also apply to occult items. Just telling me that idolatry and the occult are different does not give me a reason to ignore a biblical principle. I asked you about Egyptian cats. They weren't worshiped, but they were representations of powerful gods. Were the cats idols or were they occult talismans? Does making a distinction between idolatry and the occult even matter in regards to those cats?
There have been multiple acknowledgments in this thread that there are differences between idolatry and the occult. No one has said that they are exactly the same. What we are trying to find out from you is why you think the differences make any difference in regards to the subject of this thread.
They make a difference because divine wisdom repeatedly calls our attention to both sins separately and on an equal footing.
Since, as you say, the inspired revelation has repeatedly distinguished between the two, you should easily be able to tell us why the differences matter.
Noting carefully what God has said in His Word does not equate to being "easily able to tell . . . why the differences matter." One can and must hold that the differences matter regardless of whether he can explain why they matter.
Is there no overlap whatsoever between the two? That's what you seem to be presenting when you so adamantly declare that "distinguishing between the two is right and essential for sound doctrine."
No, I have not presented any such thing. Again, my basis for my statements is direct observation of explicit divine statements. What overlap they do or do not have is irrelevant to heeding divine wisdom that separately speaks of them and puts them on equal footing in multiple statements.
What is it specifically about the occult that distinguishes it from idolatry? Is it just the fact that different words have been used in lists for different sins?
Even if it were "just the fact that different words have been used . . .," that would be more than enough to require holding that they are distinct and that the distinctions matter.
Is that really it?
As if that is not enough?
One of the similarities mentioned earlier in the thread is that both idolatry and the occult can use crafted items.
Hmm. Fornication and idolatry can use crafted items. By your reasoning, that would mean that the two are . . .
Even the lists of sins you have quoted have emphasized similarity rather than distinction. Galatians 5:19 lists a bunch of sins as the works of the flesh. The point of that list is not to draw distinctions between witchcraft and idolatry but to show that both are in the same category.
So what? Showing that both are in the same category in one respect (works of the flesh) does not establish that differences between them are minor and inconsequential.
Discussion