Tag: spirits

When the Heart Cries “Real” but the Word Says “No”

Brent Pollard

A young man recently walked away from the church. He was troubled—genuinely so—convinced that demons from his past involvement with the occult were hounding him. He came seeking baptism, and we believe he hoped the gift of the Holy Spirit would arm him with miraculous power to fight what he feared. When Scripture did not tell him what he wished to hear, he turned to YouTube “prophets” who did. He found individuals who offered “deliverance prayers” and validated every feeling he carried. In the end, it did not matter what God’s word said, because it did not match what he felt.

His story grieves us. But it also instructs us, for it lays bare a danger that threatens every soul in every generation: the temptation to enthrone experience over revelation.

The Question of “That Which Is Perfect”

This young man, like many sincere believers, points to 1 Corinthians 13.10 and argues that “the perfect” refers to the second coming of Christ—meaning miraculous gifts continue until He returns. It is not a novel interpretation; many good-hearted people hold it. But the text itself resists it. Paul chose a neuter Greek word, rendered “that” in English. Had he meant the Lord Jesus, he would have used the masculine—”He.” The members of the Godhead are never called “that.” This is not a trivial grammatical point. It is the Holy Spirit’s own precision, and we tamper with it at our peril.

What, then, is “that which is perfect”? It is the completed, fully revealed word of God—the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3). When the last apostolic pen was laid down, revelation was finished, and the scaffolding of miraculous gifts, having served its glorious purpose, was taken away.

Witnesses from the Ancient Church

We do not stand alone in this conviction. The testimony of early Christian writers confirms what Scripture teaches. John Chrysostom, writing in the fourth century, observed plainly that the miraculous gifts Paul described had ceased. Those baptized in his day, he noted, no longer spoke in the tongues of all nations as believers had in the first century. Augustine of Hippo agreed, writing that such miracles “were no longer permitted to continue in our time,” lest they become commonplace and lose their power to produce faith. Cyril of Alexandria taught that the miraculous gift of languages at Pentecost was a temporary sign intended for the Jews—kept for life by those who first received it, but not passed beyond their generation.

These men were not skeptics. They were devoted servants of Christ who recognized what the New Testament itself describes: miraculous gifts were conferred exclusively through the laying on of the apostles’ hands (Acts 8.14–17), and an apostle had to meet the requirements of Acts 1.21–22. Since no one alive today meets those requirements, the chain of miraculous conferral has been broken—not by human failure, but by divine design.

We might also note a striking practical detail. Paul, who possessed the gift of healing, left his fellow minister Trophimus sick at Miletus (2 Timothy 4.20) and advised Timothy to treat his stomach ailments with a little wine rather than a miracle (1 Timothy 5.23). Even the apostle did not wield miraculous power as a tool of personal convenience. The gifts served God’s purposes, not man’s preferences.

What, Then, Are These Experiences?

If the miraculous gifts have ceased, what are we to make of the experiences people report? What of the young man who felt delivered? What of those who speak in ecstatic utterances and weep with the certainty that God has touched them?

We need not question their sincerity to question the source. The human mind is a remarkable instrument. When people pray or worship with deep intensity, the brain can enter a focused state in which the speech-filtering centers quiet down, allowing sounds and syllables to flow without conscious direction. It feels powerful precisely because it is unforced. But unforced is not the same as supernatural.

These experiences are also learned. In communities where speaking in tongues is practiced, people observe it, absorb its patterns, and are taught—directly or by imitation—how to interpret inner stirrings as the Spirit’s movement. Over time, the brain begins responding on cue. If everyone around you treats something as real, your mind learns to experience it accordingly.

Moreover, these moments often bring genuine emotional relief—a sense of belonging, closeness to God, even catharsis. A sudden thought becomes “God spoke to me.” A warm sensation becomes “the Spirit moved.” Ecstatic syllables become “tongues.” The brain, emotions, and social environment conspire together to produce something that feels deeply true. But feeling deeply true and being true are not the same thing.

Truth Is Not a Feeling

Here we must plant our feet on the bedrock of Scripture. Jesus Himself defined the matter with crystalline clarity: “Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth” (John 17.17). Truth is not discovered through sensation. It is revealed through God’s word.

Scripture warns us repeatedly against trusting the heart’s verdict. Solomon writes, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death” (Proverbs 14.12). Jeremiah is blunter still: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17.9). Sincerity, however passionate, does not guarantee truth. A man may be sincerely wrong, and his sincerity will not cushion the consequences.

Test Everything

God has never asked us to accept spiritual experiences without scrutiny. John commands, “Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God” (1 John 4.1). Paul echoes, “Test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5.21). The question is never merely “Did something happen?” but always “Does this align with what God has revealed?”

Consider what biblical tongues actually were. At Pentecost, the apostles spoke recognizable human languages. Listeners understood them in their native tongues. The purpose was communication—the delivery of God’s message to real people in real words. That bears no resemblance to unintelligible sounds requiring no translation, only the interpretation of feelings.

And let us remember: God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14.33). Even when miraculous gifts operated in the first century, they were orderly, controlled, and intelligible. If an experience bypasses understanding entirely, that alone should give us pause.

The Spirit and the Word Are Never at Odds

The Holy Spirit does not operate independently from the word He revealed (John 16.13). He will not contradict what He has already spoken. If an experience cannot be verified by Scripture, it must not be attributed to the Spirit, no matter how vivid, how comforting, or how tearfully sincere the one who claims it.

God never asks us to choose between truth and experience. If something is truly from Him, it will stand in perfect agreement with His word. Where the two appear to conflict, it is not the word that must yield.

Let us, then, be a people who love truth more than feeling, who treasure revelation above sensation, and who test all things—not because we lack faith, but because we possess it. For the God who gave us His word did not give it so we might set it aside when something more exciting comes along. He gave it because it was enough. It has always been enough. And by His grace, it will carry us all the way home.

The Identity Of Unclean Spirits

Friday’s Column: Brent’s Bent

Brent Pollard

The TL;DR (too long; didn’t read) version of this discussion is that when angels mated with human women, they produced abominable offspring whose spirits God refused to admit into the realm of the dead after He destroyed them in the Flood. The wandering spirits eventually possessed some people in the first century whom Jesus and the apostles were able to exorcise. These were the unclean spirits. Because of the power of Christ’s Gospel, they no longer have the ability to hijack our bodies today. If they are still present, they can only help to facilitate situations of temptation. But they cannot touch us or make us sin.  

For those willing to understand how I arrived at the above summary, please keep reading. 

Allow me to begin by indulging in a little inside baseball. In that case, I’ll start by highlighting one of the differences between my brother’s and my time at Faulkner University: two different godly men led the V.P. Black School of Biblical Studies. My brother had the opportunity to sit at the feet of the late Wendell Winkler, whose background was in preaching schools. Meanwhile, when I graduated, the late Kenneth Randolph was the dean. Brother Randolph decided he wanted students to build their libraries and encouraged instructors to assign textbooks to our classes whenever possible. 

I studied hermeneutics under the late Martel Pace. When is an Example Binding? by Thomas B. Warren was the actual text. However, brother Pace insisted on us purchasing Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart’s How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. When the class began, brother Pace directed us to a sentence in Fee and Stuart’s book. That sentence stated that novel interpretations are incorrect. It is erroneous if no one has ever interpreted Scripture in a given way in over two thousand years of church history. With that clarification, brother Pace told us we could throw the book away as he didn’t want us to learn how to interpret the Bible from Fee and Stuart’s liberal hermeneutic. 

Although I felt cheated at the time for wasting money on a book I wouldn’t use, brother Pace’s point has stuck with me. When I approach a Scripture or text and want to understand what it means, I first consult other Scriptures. Then, when I finally turn to human scholarship, I always look for the oldest interpretation of the Scripture. With this method, it is surprising how much of the doctrine taught in contemporary Christendom dates back less than 200 years. Other false doctrines may have origins in the 1500s, during the Protestant Reformation. Others emerged before 1000, eventually leading to the establishment of the first apostate church. 

Despite being accurate regarding salvation, we sometimes see deviations from original thought in issues of Christian judgment. For example, I’ve been thinking about angels and demons. I’ve often said that much of what people believe they know about the subject finds basis in Milton rather than Scripture (e.g., the war in heaven). The Bible is silent on angels, including their orders and responsibilities. When asked who the archangels are, you will hear names other than Gabriel and Michael (i.e., Raphael and Uriel). According to some, an archangel by the name of Lucifer fell. From whence does this extra information come? The accepted canon of Scripture does not include it. 

On the other hand, the apocryphal Book of Enoch is one source having a lot to say about angels. The Book of Watchers refers to the first thirty-six chapters of the Book of Enoch. The author of Watchers claims to explain things like how angels fell. Given that Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch, this source is more interesting than you might think. Jude quotes the apocryphal book in verses 14-15. This inclusion by the Holy Spirit does not imply that the Book of Enoch is anything other than apocryphal, but rather that this widely read book from before the first century AD still got a few things correct, precisely what Jude quotes. Although it is not a direct quotation, Jude verse six parallels ideas found in the Book of Watchers, namely that the “angels who did not keep their own domain but abandoned their proper abode” (NASB1995) refers to angels who chose to leave heaven to intermarry with human women. 

It took a long time for me to accept this. I was of the school of thought that interpreted Genesis 6’s “sons of God” as the descendants of Seth, who began calling on the Lord’s name (Genesis 4.26). That was a more recent interpretation contradicting the phrase “sons of God,” which almost always referred to angels. Even so, I would never teach what I am about to discuss as doctrine because it may confuse some. However, if one considers the context of Jude, one will notice that the sin of verse six is akin to that of Sodom and Gomorrah (Jude 1.7). In other words, it was a matter of immoral sexual behavior. It was never in God’s plan for angels to have companions. They are presumably “complete,” lacking nothing in their distinct being. In response to the Sadducees, this is why Jesus stated, “…in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven” (emphasis mine—Matthew 22.30 NASB1995). 

I’ve heard it preached that Jesus said angels can’t get married, but He said they don’t get married in heaven. It is not a giant leap to conclude that if angels took on a form with a digestive system (cf. Genesis 18.5ff), being able to eat, they could also take on a reproductive system commensurate with the masculine forms assumed in their interactions with humanity. Furthermore, Paul warns us that the devil can disguise himself as an angel of light (2 Corinthians 11.14). So, it appears God endowed angels with such abilities implied by taking on an assumed form. 

But how does this relate to unclean spirits? What does this even have to do with Faulkner University and hermeneutics? Following the Scriptures, I will consult other scholarship sources; the earlier, the better. So, I went back and read what early Christian writers like Justin Martyr and Origen had to say about the subject. Justin, in particular, confirmed Jude’s message that the angels’ transgression was sexual. According to Justin, angels fell in love with human women and decided to copulate with them, the latter giving birth to the “mighty men of old, men of renown” (Genesis 6.4). These deviations resulted in conditions that caused God to regret creating man. One of the things that the Book of Watchers says that Justin seems to accept is that these fallen angels taught men how to make weapons of war and fight one another. Have you ever thought about Genesis 6.13? God saw the earth filled with violence. That is an intriguing coincidence. 

As a result, God destroyed all except Noah, Noah’s family, and the animals aboard the ark with a Flood. But what became of those who died in the Flood? Would Ecclesiastes 12.7 not be applicable? Their “dust” was returned to the earth, while God received their spirits. But what if among the dead were spirits inhabiting bodies that God did not sanction, a cross between fallen angels and humans? Would He let those spirits into Sheol or Hades? Wouldn’t they be punished like the fallen angels for whom God created hell itself (2 Peter 2.4-10)? 

It appears unlikely that the “unclean spirits” mentioned in the Gospels and the book of Acts are the spirits of evil, departed men. A teacher once told me that Legion hung out in the cemetery (Mark 5.1ff) to linger near their former bodies. In other words, whoever the Legion demons were, they were all former humans doomed to spend eternity in hell. But why would God choose to isolate the miraculous period of the first century to allow some evil deceased spirits to remain and not send them immediately into the realm of the dead, as Ecclesiastes 12.7 suggests? Of course, God could direct every such person into the path of Jesus or the apostles for exorcism, but it seems strange to defy nature just to read about a few exorcisms in the Gospels and Acts. Indeed, the ability to raise the dead alone could serve as the ultimate form of confirmation of the Gospel. Moreover, since the power of sin is death, raising the dead would still prove our Lord’s power of the kingdom of darkness (1 Corinthians 15.51-57).  

Examine how Jesus interacts with these unclean spirits (aka demons). In Matthew’s account of Legion, another demon-possessed man accompanies Legion (Matthew 8.28). Both possessed men were violent and would not let anyone pass. The ones inside these men recognized Jesus as the Son of God and wondered if He had come to torment them ahead of time(Matthew 8.29). They asked Jesus to send them into an adjacent herd of swine if He was going to cast them out of those men (Matthew 8.31). When Jesus granted their request, the demons caused the herd of pigs to jump into the sea and drown (Matthew 8.32). Why not send them to Hades if these were the departed spirits of evil men? Why put them in pigs? 

These unclean spirits knew God would destroy them, but they thought the time was too soon. Of course, we know that those in Tartarus, the place of torment within Hades, like the rich man, immediately knew their eternal fate, but how else would these possessing living men in the first century know such things? They had probably never experienced Tartarus’ torment because they were free to roam (cf. Matthew 12.43-45; Luke 11.24-26). Again, it would appear to be inconsistent with what we know about our existence following death. It makes more sense, however, if there have been spirits of grotesque angel-human hybrids roaming the earth since the Flood. 

Let us look at some examples of demon exorcism in Acts to illustrate these fascinating phenomena further. First, Paul cast out an unclean spirit from a young woman who had been following him around Philippi, proclaiming him to be a servant of the Most High God and preaching the way of salvation (Acts 16.16-21). Paul became irritated with her and rebuked the spirit in Jesus’ name, causing the demon to flee. The event that led to Paul and Silas’ imprisonment in Philippi was this exorcism. When Paul expelled the evil spirit, he took away her divining ability that her owners exploited to make money. Then, in Ephesus, Paul exorcised demons without even being in their presence. People took handkerchiefs that Paul had touched, which were enough to heal and drive away the evil spirits (Acts 19.12).  

This display of Jesus’ power prompted some of Paul’s opponents to try to imitate him. Finally, Acts 19.13-16 contains a humorous account of a failed exorcism. Sceva’s seven sons took it upon themselves to exorcise an evil spirit in the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches. The demon said it recognized Jesus and Paul but wanted to know who these men were. The possessed man then leaped on them and thrashed them mercilessly. It caused quite a stir in Ephesus and inspired both Jews and Gentiles to exalt Jesus’ name (Acts 19.17). 

There are no further references to unclean spirits after Ephesus. We know Paul told the Corinthians that the miraculous age would end when the perfect (i.e., complete) arrived (1 Corinthians 13.8-12). By the end of the first century, God had completed His revelation to mankind. And then there was the New Testament. But what about the spirits? Origen, a Christian who lived near the end of the second century, observed that the demons vanished along with the ending of the spiritual gifts bestowed by the apostles through the laying on of hands (cf. Acts 8.14-17).  

In other words, Jesus Christ’s power defeated the kingdom of darkness. Those spirits, if still present, could no longer possess people or cause mischief as they did during the brief period described in the New Testament. This statement does not imply that Origen did not have some ideas. He did. Since, as James stated, our lusts entice us, allow our desires to conceive, and give birth to sin (James 1.14-15), the remaining unclean spirits serve as “midwives,” facilitating our sin. This truth does not absolve us of our guilt, but it may point to perpetrators in the unseen realm who are more than willing to assist us. 

“Rhosts!”

Wednesday’s Column: Third’s Words

Gary Pollard

My favorite show is Scooby Doo (the originals, of course). It’s packed with ghosts and monsters, most of which are exposed as frauds or criminals. Mankind has been fascinated with ghosts and other postmortem apparitions for a while. They make great stories and nearly every culture has ghost stories. We point to widespread legends of dragons as one evidence of man’s coexistence with dinosaurs. Since so many cultures have these ghost stories, is it possible they’re true? 

Life and death are God’s jurisdiction, so let’s see if he’s said anything about the subject. Who better to ask about the other side than the one who controls it? 

Look at Luke 16.19-31. Whether this is literal or figurative is immaterial, I just want to look at something Jesus described in detail. A rich man neglected Lazarus (an impoverished man) and ended up in torment after death. He lets Abraham know that he has family on earth who don’t believe and he wants to prevent them from sharing his fate. 

Abraham points out that a large abyss acts as a barrier, preventing anyone from moving between realms. He’s specifically talking about passing from torment to paradise and vice versa, but the rich man was nonetheless incapable of leaving under his own power. 

Hebrews 9 says that we die one time and face judgment. This seems to indicate some permanence to our destination. We know that some spiritual entities are capable of interacting with our world (angels/demons) in some capacity, but the Bible doesn’t give us much detail. 

We can state with a decent degree of confidence, though, that the dead are stuck where they are. That’s a major comfort, too, because our future is secure if we die in Christ (I Peter 1.3-7). They make for great plots (and the best cartoon ever), but ghosts remain solidly in our awesome imaginations.  

Dispiriting Truths About Spirits

Neal Pollard

In one of those statistics so massive that it is hard to comprehend, Gallup reports that 187 billion liters (there are 33.8 ounces in a liter) of beer are drunk across the world each year. There are 24 billion liters of wine drunk globally each year. The U.S. ranks second in beer consumption and first in wine consumption, with no reports of hard liquor even included in this report (Andrew Soergel, US News, 10/2/14). Not only is alcohol a common feature at holiday parties and family events this time of year, it is woven into the fabric of just about every event you can think of in society.

The Washington Post relates that 33 million Americans are problem drinkers, which amounts to 14 percent of our population. Almost 69 million Americans report that they had been problem drinkers at some point in their lives, while 40 percent said they had engaged in binge drinking at least once in the past year (via Associate Press, 6/8/15).  Whereas we can so often get caught up in debates about social drinking, we may be ignoring the fact that a sizable number of Christians—whether new converts or longtime members—struggle with serious problems with alcohol. This is startling, given the Bible’s clear teaching and warning about drunkenness (cf. Rom. 13:13; 1 Cor. 5:11; 6:10; Gal. 5:21; 1 Pet. 4:3).

The Bible warns us about at least four clarion facts regarding alcohol:

  • Alcohol can be addicting (1 Tim. 3:3,8; Titus 1:7).
  • Alcohol can be enslaving (Titus 2:3).
  • Alcohol can make one reckless (Eph. 5:18).
  • Alcohol can be costly (Prov. 23:29-35).

It seems wise to think about these sober warnings God communicates to us through Scripture. There should be a vigilance, in view of eternity, about a substance that not only can but endlessly has done so much harm to individuals, their families, and society. May we wake up to the problems alcohol is already causing in too many homes, including the homes of those trying to live the Christian life. May we help each other to overcome any obstacle that bars the way to heaven. Nothing here is valuable enough to sacrifice what awaits us there.