Articles of faith
leftmenu

Comments on "The bondage breaker", Neil Anderson

(Page numbers refer to French edition).

Introduction

This book gives a good perspective on our identity "in Christ" and the reality that we are "a new creation" in him. It accepts the reality of Satan and demons and attempts to allow for their activity whilst taking account of material and psychological realities. It highlights the possibility for the christian of no longer living under the yoke of the enemy and gives indications which some may find useful. However it also presents significant difficulties at several levels.

1. Theological difficulties

1.1 Incorrectly opposing life in Christ and in the flesh

The book tends to minimise the reality of our life "in the flesh". On page 48 we read:

"You are no longer in the flesh, as your old nature was; henceforth you are in Christ". This affirmation is not backed up by a Scripture reference.

The Bible teaches that the christian no longer lives according to the flesh, but not that he no longer lives in it.

It also speaks of being in Christ, but this is opposed not to being in the flesh but to being "in Adam" (1 Cor 15:22). This is a declaration of our eternal position, not our current experience of reality.

The opposition of being "in Christ" and "in the flesh" leads the author to spiritualise all problems - there is no place for the material world in his system. "Our identity is rooted not in our physical existence, but in our relationship with God" (p39).

Our life is currently lived in the flesh and we need room for this much more complex reality in our practical theology. As Paul summarises it in Galatians 2:20:

"I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. The life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me."

1.2 Human responsibility diminished to the benefit of Satan's

According to Anderson, Satan has taken Adam's place in exercising the creation mandate:

"Initially, God created Adam and his race to reign over creation. But because of sin, Adam lost his position of authority and Satan became the rebel in power... (Satan) took power when Adam abdicated from the throne at the Fall" (p98).

Nothing in the Bible suggests that man has been stripped of his creation mandate, even if it has become harder to exercise. Where in the Bible do we see angels, fallen or otherwise, take over the roles of men? Meanwhile, Psalm 8:7 (written after the Fall!) still says to God that he has given man to "rule over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet".

Such a position greatly reduces the concept of human responsibility in favour of Satan's power in the created order. Once again, it leads to over-spiritualised solutions being offered, since solutions with a human dimension must be tainted by Satan's mastery over this dimension.

1.3 The negation of the self

"Your soul was not created to be a master... by renouncing self, you invited God to be on the throne of your life (p38).

The Bible makes it clear that we cannot act fully autonomously and that in the end we are in the service of God or the adversary. In this sense it can be said that we are not masters. But we are at least called to be responsible and acountable stewards of the life God gives us. If God can be said to "be on the throne of our life" (not a biblical expression), God cannot be said to take away our individual responsibility. He is not aiming for the negation of self but the redemption of self.

1.4 Unconditional forgiveness

Unconditional forgiveness is presented as a vital step towards freedom in Christ.

"Jesus' sacrifice makes forgiveness both morally and legally justified. Since God has forgiven these people, you can too" (p196)

This honourable sentiment hides a category confusion between sin (the offence against God) and wrong (the offense against one's fellow man). God having forgiven the offender's sin does not mean we have not suffered the trauma of an offence. Confronting such an offence in our lives and being healed of it can involve a significant amount of work which does not happen overnight.

(While we are called to set ourselves free of this trauma (Mt 6:12), it can be misleading to talk exclusively in terms of "forgiveness". Forgiveness occurs when there is reconciliation with the offender: the Bible does not seem to speak of forgiveness being granted unless the offender recognises they have wronged the victim (see for example 2 Cor 5:19-20). Otherwise it is more a case of "giving it to God" (see 1 P 2:23)).

Forcing an act of forgiveness in prayer as an imperative during a process of deliverance ("remind them that they must forgive in order to be free of past sufferings", p221) threatens to inflict further trauma. Even if there is some temporary respite, the risk is that the person is pushed into denial instrad of being able to confront and deal with their hurt. Telling yourself you have "forgiven" in such circumstances is to inflict a false belief on oneself which goes against our moral instinct and which is likely to bring other problems later. The worst is that anyone refusing to go through such a process risks being accused of being "in the clutches of Satan" (p220).

It is hardly suprising that "the forgiveness stage is by far the hardest and many people emerge from it physically tired" (p221). One wonders how genuine such "forgiveness" can be.

1.5 Necessary "victory"

The following paragraph seems to explain the author's overall approach:

"Those who say that a demon cannot control part of a believer's life leave us only two choices to explain the problems we encounter: either we are to blame, or God is. If we blame ourselves, we sink into despair because we cannot overcome certain behaviours. If we blame God, our trust in our loving Father is shattered. In either case, we have no chance of winning the victory the Bible promises us (p174).

This perspective seems to identify victory promised by God with deliverance from every problem ("God will protect you, bless you, and... no harm will come to you", p198). For the author, it is Satan and his demons who are responsibile for these problems, and he has no power over our new identity in Christ. Deliverance must therefore always be possible through confession and prayer. Even if this paragraph seems to avoid blaming the individual, in the long run it is understood that if someone does not experience such "victory", it can only be that they have not followed the prescribed method, so it is their fault in the end.

The picture is skewed by reducing the responsibility for all problems to God, the individual, or the devil. There is no room for factors such as the past, the environment, others, or for the mysteries of live in which it is impossible (short of being extremely simplistic) and surely useless to determine respective responsibilities (see John 9:2-3). One wonders how the author would apportion these "responsibilities" in the case of Job, and what advice he would have given the latter for him to have "victory". Surely the victory of Job is his expression of trust in God in spite of the problems he faces? "I know my Redeemer lives" (Job 19:25); "this is the victory that overcomes the world, even our faith" (1 Jn 5:4); "we are savec in hope" (Rom 8:24).

Could it be that the author's well-intentioned but ill-founded insistence on the possibility of seeing all christians delivered is a rationalisation of his own doubts about God's mercy - like Job's friends?

1.6 An unbiblical attitude to Satan

The author goes well beyond biblical data concerning Satan (for example, his ability to 'redirect' poorly worded prayers to his advantage, p32).
He is also proud of his mockery of demonic attacks, "is that the best you can do", p85. Jude 8-10 warns us not to "insult heavenly beings". If the archangel Michael did not dare say more than "may the Lord rebuke you", who are we to say more? Towards the end of the book the author warns against attempting to enter into conversation with demons, having given us the detail of such a conversation and used it to improve his working knowledge of demons (pp96-98).

2. Ethical and pastoral difficulties

2.1 Reliability of testimonies

The book is full of grateful testimonies to Mr Anderson for his deliverance ministry. The big problem is that for the most part there is no way of knowing how long these deliverances have lasted. We can rejoice that "Sheila" has been delivered from skin rashes, bolimia, and immorality... until we read "but all that ended yesterday" (p172). What church leader would dare to proclaim such a deliverance for one of their church members in such circumstances, still less use it to back up their pastoral practice?

There are many means and methods by which people claim to feel better, even in the realm of physical healing. We can only judge on long-term fruit.

The author makes much of the conversion of "Harry", "high priest at the top levels of satanism" (p86). Six months after the latter's conversion, Anderson asks him at the end of giving his testimony, "based on what you experienced 'on the other side', what would you say is the christian's best defence against demonic influence?" (p86). In the rest of the book "Harry"'s contributions play an important role, for example in revealing the organisation of satanism (p101). His words are presented as trustworthy. Then we learn that having signed a pact with satanists "stipulating that he would never give his testimony again", the author "never heard from him again" (p114). How much credibility should be given to such a person who could just as easily be a lunatic, a crook, or both... and how much credibility should be given to someone who trusts him in this way?

There is a striking difference with the reaction of a former spiritualist medium who was converted through the ministry of Martyn Lloyd-Jones. "When she was asked what she thought about the story of Saul and the witch of Endor, she hung her head and simply said that the 'preferred never to think of such evil again'. True revulsion to satanic power can only arise from experience of it." (White, When the Spirit comes with power, p143).

2.2 Leading questions

When trying to obtain information from someone regarding their personal difficulties it is vital not to put words in their mouth. One girl tells Anderson that her friend's mother "did strange things" in her house. He asks her "did these strange things involve candles and sacrifices, sometimes involving the killing of animals?" and then "were you ever asked to get undressed during one of these rituals?" (p73-74). Questioning someone who is psychologically fragile and possibly attention-seeking in this fashion enables virtually anything to be "admitted"on the sole basis of one's own thoughts.

2.3 Danger of spiritual abuse

The negation of self ("the Lord must be on the throne") coupled with the necessity of pastorally-guided deliverance can lead to an unhealthy dependence on the authority figure. In the "submission instead of rebellion" stage we read: "we will be much better... if we let the message judge us instead of criticising it. [new paragraph] Rebelling against God only leads to problems" (p197). Although there is a break, the association of submission to God and submission to the preacher is cause for concern.

2.4 A method-centred "therapy"

The stages of deliverance are so "off the shelf" that they could be described as rites, complete with ready-to-use prayers. For the practices described in the "inventory", "if one of your family has been involved in one of these, better add it to the list... just in case you might have unknowingly given a foothold to Satan" (p189). This approach has more to do with superstition than with a living relationship with God.