Anyone who has served Jesus for any length of time will appreciate the truth of there being an evil entity who is intensely opposed to the reign of Christ. Plans to prayerfully spread the Gospel are met with a myriad of obstacles, and we often experience persecution (Revelation 2:9). Especially, getting the family ready for church on a Sunday morning is often a battle. Why? Because we have an enemy who wants to discourage and stumble us in whatever way he can.

Every Christian faces a three-fold enemy of the world, the flesh and the Devil. Even though Satan has been defeated by the person and work of Jesus (Luke 10:18; John 12:31; 1 John 3:8), the spiritual battle continues. And while it is impossible for someone who has been born again to be possessed by an unclean spirit, there is still a sense in which believers are oppressed by the Devil. This article examines what the Bible says we should expect in this regard.
1 Peter 5:8 tells us we should be self-controlled and alert because our enemy the Devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. What’s more, we’re told that if we submit ourselves to God and resist the Devil, then he will immediately flee (James 4:7). While we are ultimately kept safe by the sovereign power of God (Jude 1, 24; Phil 1:3-6) this doesn’t mean that there are not real spiritual threats or dangers.
Setbacks and Opposition in Ministry
In 1 Thessalonians 2:18 the apostle Paul says, “We wanted to come to you — certainly I, Paul, did, again and again — but Satan stopped us.” Clearly, the Devil has a certain amount of influence in this present world. Elsewhere, in Ephesians 6, Paul famously writes that our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers in the heavenly realms.
While within divinely predetermined limits, the experience of Job is also illuminating. In chapters 1 and 2, we are explicitly told how the Devil was the cause of Job’s suffering. Whether it be the theft of oxen and donkeys by the Sabeans, a fire from heaven which destroyed his sheep, three lots of Chaldean raiding parties who carried off his camels, a mighty wind which caused the death of his children, or the personal suffering of physical illness. Each and every one of these things are directly attributable to Satan.
Anyone who has served Jesus for any length of time will appreciate the truth of there being an evil entity who is intensely opposed to the reign of Christ. Plans to prayerfully spread the Gospel are met with a myriad of obstacles, and we often experience persecution (Revelation 2:9). Especially, getting the family ready for church on a Sunday morning is often a battle. Why? Because we have an enemy who wants to discourage and stumble us in whatever way he can.
Unresolved Anger
One of the things which is striking about the work of Satan — particularly in the New Testament epistles — is how ‘ordinary’ it is. Take for instance Paul’s words in Ephesians 4:26-27. “In your anger do not sin: Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry, and do not give the devil a foothold.”
Note the logical flow between the two verses. In verse 26 we are told not to allow our anger to be expressed in sinful ways. Being angry in and of itself is not a sin. As with Jesus’ response to the Pharisees in Mark 3:1-6, sometimes anger is not only justified, but a godly response. Although, being continually angry all the time doesn’t bring about righteous life which God requires (see James 1:19-20).
The key though is to not let the sun go down while we are still angry about something and we haven’t made an attempt to resolve it. Sweeping our anger under the carpet like that doesn’t solve things, but only makes it worse. Indeed, it gives the Devil a ‘foothold’ in twisting our hearts and driving a wedge between ourselves and the other person.
Unforgiveness and Division
Closely following on from the previous point, is Satan’s strategy to “divide and conquer”. The Lord Jesus says that even the Devil would not drive out a demon from someone because it would destroy what he is doing (i.e. Matthew 12:25-28). Alternatively, though, Satan seeks to divide Christians against each other (contra Jesus’ prayer in John 17:20-23).
One of the chief ways in which Devil does this is through division. And the mechanism through which this is achieved is unforgiveness. In 2 Corinthians 2:5-11 the apostle Paul refers to the restoration of an individual who had previously undergone some form of church discipline.
Read More
Related Posts:

Scripture teaches us the necessity of being good evangelists (Matt. 28), but it also teaches us to be good watchmen (Ezek. 33) over the city and over the people. Shouldn’t we be just as concerned about the consequences of evil being unleashed–even on the Church–by corporate entities as we are about the salvation of souls?

How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! – Matt. 23:37
An Understanding & Definition
Our mission at Tanglewood Ministries is to teach how evil can be restrained and how to live together in an orderly manner–something that must be taught regularly in churches today by

Showing love for Christ by obeying what He commands. (John 14:15)

Warning against corporate violations of the Moral Law thereby subjecting whole groups and even nations to God’s judgment. (Ezek. 18:30)

Subjecting ourselves to governing authorities [except when those authorities command us to disobey God]. (Rom. 13:1 and Acts 4:18)

Understanding the doctrine of Common Grace whereby God can and does restrain evil through governing authorities (Romans 13) and makes the same promise to us today found in 2 Chronicles 7:14. So, isn’t it also Good News when nations begin to live under His protection? The answer is yes, and these things need to be taught in our churches.

While we support the work of today’s church and para-church ministries, our role at Tanglewood Ministries is to warn others about corporate groups (government, academia, big tech, banking, and even the established church, etc.) who violate the Moral Law of God. Scripture teaches us the necessity of being good evangelists (Matt. 28), but it also teaches us to be good watchmen (Ezek. 33) over the city and over the people. Shouldn’t we be just as concerned about the consequences of evil being unleashed–even on the Church–by corporate entities as we are about the salvation of souls? Biblically and historically, there is always a high price to pay for not heeding the warnings of Scripture, for not seeking God’s protection, and for not sounding the alarm when corporate groups violate His Moral Law.
Recently a group of Roman Catholic bishops met to discuss whether Catholic politicians like Joe Biden should continue to receive Communion because of their personal and political pro-choice positions. At a conference in November of 2021, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops passed a document by a vote of 222-8 which appeared to empower individual priests to deny Communion to pro-abortion rights politicians should they encounter them. Equally important is the corporate nature of the president’s sin. Shouldn’t that be the proper role of the Church and its leaders as well? Exercised biblically, the church has always had great spiritual power to proclaim everything Christ commanded–including His warnings–and it still does–even to a president and to a nation who follows him in his political position on abortion.
Remember to be thankful for those who do acknowledge and teach soundly on the moral issues. We may disagree doctrinally on many points with Roman Catholics, who are also concerned about the moral injuries to everyone caused by corporate sins (e.g., the political position of politicians on abortion), but again we should be thankful for these bishops who were concerned enough about the spiritual health of the president, other politicians, and the church to discuss the issue and pass a document.
Also, be concerned about the medium used to convey the message, but not at the expense of the biblical message. The medium needs to be constantly evaluated to make sure that all that Scripture says on a subject is being proclaimed. The medium used at Tanglewood Ministries, and the one we are proposing to the church, is both predictive (one who warns about ignoring God’s Moral Law) and evangelistic (the Gospel). Both must be delivered with grace and mercy, and both are Good News.
Unfortunately, today, the evangelistic duties of the church often minimize the importance of its predictive duties–as is the case when we warn individuals and groups of the consequences of their sinful actions. What is needed is “salt and light” (Mt. 5:13-16) in both areas. The proper balance between the evangelistic and predictive focus of Scripture is best accomplished when we teach the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:26-27). It’s not either/or, but both/and because both evangelistic and predictive duties are fundamental to Christian thought and doctrine.
Below is a letter I recently wrote to a follow pastor. It is meant to be analogous to Lam. 5:7 (“We bear their punishment”) but only in the sense when we actually commit the same sin or remain silent (also sinful) which precludes a deterministic view of this verse.
“Our fathers sinned and are no more, and we bear their punishment.” (Lam. 5:7)
My Dear Brother,
It is so good to hear from you; and I well understand, regarding church matters, the importance of smooth transitions between the retiring pastor and new pastor. I think for most matters that a gentleman’s agreement–not to meet with anyone relative to church matters without the new pastor being present as you have describe–works best. 
That being said, the old adage “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing” is still very prevalent today. Most church members look for solid biblical teaching and a pleasant time among believers, even if only one day a week. They need and deserve this time. Some think only in these terms, but there is another consideration which must also be taught and nurtured. There are times when immediate attention to an unpleasant and troubling matter is warranted, and that somehow light will come out of darkness.
Such is a time for the Presbyterian Church in America. Knowledge of the Revoice movement and “same-sex attracted candidates” to the Gospel ministry came as a shock, and perhaps too late (though we pray not), for most members and ruling and teaching elders to reverse the trend of events. Early on, proceedings in church courts were in the hands of some very capable and powerful men–men I might add whom I love as brothers, though I think some were wrong in their understanding of Scripture and of our Confessions regarding “Side B” ordination.
The message contained in my poster (“The PCA will never be able to argue “side B” ordination in God’s court) summarizes my biblical understanding on the subject of same-sex attracted, or in the vernacular of Revoice advocates, “Side B” (attracted, but not practicing homosexuality) candidates to the Gospel ministry. According to the Bible and the Westminster Confession of Faith (the lens through which Reformed Presbyterians understand theology, just as a Baptist would utilize the Baptist Confession or a commentary by C.H. Spurgeon), ordaining a man who is same-sex attracted should not to be permitted (Rom. 1:18-27); and that this is not just the concern of a few church leaders, but should be the immediate concern of all church members.
Conclusion:
If the “Side B” doctrine is neither “expressly set down in Scripture” nor “deduced from Scripture” (WCF 1:6), and if the Progressive “Side” B proponents outmaneuver the Confessional proponents, then isn’t this a case of corporate sin in the PCA, and shouldn’t we all (including me as a Teaching Elder) bear the punishment of others if we continue in their ways (my understanding of Lamentations 5:7 from the Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible)? This summer’s PCA General Assembly will be a test case, like no other, to determine if the PCA remains Reformed. Our prayer is that the PCA will remain Reformed, but only if it rejects the “Side” B doctrine.
Note:
For inexplicable reasons, some may not be moved by my references to Scripture and to the Confessions of Our Faith, so I am providing a relevant warning from Franco-English writer and historian, Hilaire Belloc:
“In a word, the Barbarian is discoverable everywhere in this, that he cannot make: that he can befog and destroy but that he cannot sustain; and of every Barbarian in the decline or peril of every civilization exactly that has been true.
We sit by and watch the barbarian. We tolerate him in the long stretches of peace, we are not afraid. We are tickled by his irreverence; his comic inversion of our old certitudes and our fixed creed refreshes us; we laugh. But as we laugh we are watched by large and awful faces from beyond, and on these faces there are no smiles.”
Charlie Rodriquez is a retired Minister in the Presbyterian Church in America and lives in the Dallas, Texas area.

It’s progressives who rarely defy political orthodoxy and who harbor disdain for conservatives. And the hardening lines between these two groups add weight to the thesis of J. Gresham Machen a century ago: when it comes to Christianity and theological liberalism, we really are talking about two different religions.

Are conservative Christians prone to politicizing their faith, conflating Republican Party politics with biblical fidelity?
Some are, and we could point to plenty of examples. But the bigger, underreported story is that conservative Christians are not uniquely prone to such errors, and in fact, “progressive” Christians outpace their conservative counterparts in succumbing to politicization.
One Faith No Longer
George Yancey and Ashlee Quosigk’s new book, One Faith No Longer: the Transformation of Christianity in Red and Blue America, published by NYU Press earlier this year, has a provocative thesis. Based on new research and extensive interviews, the authors claim current progressive-conservative divisions among Christians in the U.S. (descending from the modernist-fundamentalist battles a century ago) are manifestations of fundamentally different belief systems.
Yancey and Quosigk believe we are not dealing with minor alterations in doctrine and values, but belief systems that have grown so drastically different that each side’s “goals” become oppositional, thereby “interfering with one another’s ability to accomplish their desired purposes” (209).
In defining conservative and progressive Christians, the authors use theological rather than political criteria. Individuals who believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God and say Jesus is the only path to salvation are conservative Christians. Those who do not believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God and do not see Jesus as the only path to salvation are progressive Christians.
The decision to define these groups by theological rather than political criteria is itself one of the areas where the differences between progressives and conservatives are most starkly represented. Everywhere we turn, we hear that conservative evangelicalism has become overly politicized and partisan, unable to speak to power prophetically. And we can certainly point to people and places where this has been the case. But we’re wrong to assume that the answer to this politicization will be found by turning to the Christian left. On the contrary, progressive Christians who fit this description are more, not less, politically minded than the conservative Christians.
Here are three surprises from Yancey and Quosigk’s research.
1. Progressive Christians are more likely to establish their identity through politics, while conservative Christians find their identity in theology.
Put simply, progressive Christians see the world through a political lens; conservative Christians, through a religious lens (155). This doesn’t mean that progressives are atheological and conservatives apolitical, but only that the emphasis is wildly disparate between the groups.
For example, progressive Christians…

…emphasize political values relating to social justice issues as they determine who is part of their in-group; they tend to be less concerned about theological agreement. Conservative Christians, however, do not put strong emphasis on political agreement in order to determine if you are one of them—their major concern is whether you agree with them on core theological points…(4)

Read More