SLSW Criticisms

The first criticism of Spiritual Level Spiritual Warfare (SLSW) is that it lacks support in Scripture. If SLSW involves weapons crucial for effective ministry, why is the invitation to discover and embrace these weapons absent from the New Testament? One would expect it to be a major theme in equipping the saints, accompanied by clear teaching. Yet, while spiritual warfare is referenced, there are no teachings on any of the weapons that Greenwood relies upon. David Powlison observes that the existence of territorial spirits "does not mean we are called to directly address such spirits, seeking to drive them out. Strategic-level spiritual warfare has no biblical precedent or warrant—the Bible simply does not go there" (p. 206).

Greenwood attempts to present a scriptural example of SLSW by retelling the story in Acts 16 of Paul casting out a demon from a slave girl, citing multiple dynamics of SLSW at work. However, she appears to read her own agenda into the text, as the passage itself holds very little to support or promote her conclusions. Reading Scripture alone would never lead someone to learn about, adopt, or practice SLSW.

The case for SLSW is not built on Biblical teaching, but rather on the perceived effectiveness of the practices presented in anecdotal accounts. As Gregory Boyd cautions, "we need to be aware of just how subjective our perspectives are when it comes to assessing whether or not a ministry strategy 'works,' especially when we are already committed to the strategy in question" (p. 211). Anecdotal evidence is often highly selective, creating a perception of effectiveness that may be far more than another observer would confirm. It is not that the narrator is lying, but rather that they are emphasizing certain details while ignoring others. When they tell the story, you are not getting the actual event or experience. You are only getting it through the lens of the way they tell it. So with a story that they tell as evidence for the effectiveness of SLSW, you might not have come to that conclusion had you been there and experienced what they did.

Anecdotal evidence is really only persuasive if you already want to believe in SLSW. Why, then, would someone question something that supposedly "holds great potential for defeating the powers of darkness and seeing people freed and society transformed toward the model of God's Kingdom" (p. 198)? Many who support SLSW, and admit that it does lack direct Biblical support, offer that it is an equipping that God has provided for this current age. Why not embrace these practices, even though they are not based on Scripture? What might be the harm?

Boyd raises two primary concerns about Greenwood's promotion of SLSW. The first is about the subjective nature of SLSW and how much people are relying on impressions and insights that come not from Biblical teaching, but rather through their own personal encounters that they attribute to the Holy Spirit. While Boyd believes that people can "hear from God" in subjective ways, he cautions... "Regardless of how strong our impressions may be, we must never forget the myopic, sin-tainted, and error-prone nature of our perspectives. My concern is that the authority and importance given to subjective impressions in the strategic-level spiritual warfare movement inclines people to minimize, or ignore altogether, this all-important fact. And this, in turn, can lead to a host of other potential problems" (p. 212). Scripture serves as a crucial boundary against subjective error, being "profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction" (2 Tim 3:16). Because SLSW is operating without clear Biblical instruction, the tendency for the error-prone nature of our perspectives to get it wrong is missing this corrective role.

Furthermore, Satan can easily manipulate our myopic, sin-tainted and error prone perspectives to foster a "host of other potential problems". In SLSW, individuals rely on subjective impressions while engaging a realm far beyond human understanding - a realm about which Scripture gives minimal instruction. Is it wise to believe that we are being equipped in this way for effective warfare? Or are we more likely to be manipulated by Satan as we operate from our error-prone perspectives, believing that we are serving God when in fact we could be advancing Satan's purposes?

We see this dynamic in Mark 8:33, where Peter attempts to dissuade Jesus from anticipating suffering at the hands of His enemies. Though Peter believed he was offering faithful, loving encouragement, Jesus attributes Peter's counsel to Satan - noting that Peter had set his mind on human things rather than divine things. Because of his flawed perspective, Peter inadvertently served Satan's purposes instead of God's.

It could be dangerous to operate with weapons derived from subjective impressions while engaging an enemy capable of influencing us through those very impressions.

Boyd's second concern involves how Greenwood understands the role of the church in Spiritual Warfare with regard to authority and power. I will look at that in the next post.