“Touching God’s anointed…out in the pews..”
For a great lot of ‘these” believe the “big anointed” means “just them”*
..*their own, mostly occult, elite special selves….
Moral Purpose: Prophetic Charismatic Reform: “Witch watching, far away mind reading, diagnosing”
(C)2024 Taveau D’Arcy Creative Leadership All copyrights reserved under international copyright law
This is Submitted Selah, a warning and “ONLY. if any shoe fits, should anyone attempt to wear it”
Common Themes and Fruits of These Doctrines Subcultures and More Not Mentioned:
(see many other definitions and CHAT GPT AI Comments SERIES PARTS 1-4)
- Authoritarian Control: In these movements, leadership often wields excessive control, creating an environment where questioning or dissent is equated with rebellion, which leads to accusations of witchcraft or Jezebel spirits.
- Lack of Relational Accountability: Many of these groups bypass personal relationship, failing to follow biblical protocols like Matthew 18:15-16 or Galatians 6:1. Instead of confronting individuals with love and gentleness, leaders may operate from a distance, relying on prophetic discernment without interaction.
- Misuse of Spiritual Gifts: Discernment and prophecy are often used to accuse or control others, rather than for edification or restoration. This results in slander, gossip, and the potential for grievous harm to the body of Christ.
- Gender Bias and Misogyny: Women are frequently the targets of accusations, particularly those who challenge or don’t fit within the rigid patriarchal frameworks of these movements.
- Spirit of Fear and Control: Accusations of witchcraft and spiritual defilement are often used to instill fear and maintain control over congregations, rather than fostering a spirit of love, unity, and accountability as described in Ephesians 4.
It would be inaccurate and unfair to say that every single person in top leadership in movements such as NAR, Shepherding, Levitical Patriarchism, and other Pentecostal, Charismatic, or Word of Faith groups all engage in controlling or abusive practices. Leadership styles, theological interpretations, and the application of doctrines can vary widely, even within the same movement or denomination.
Here’s a more nuanced view:
1. Not Every Leader Practices Control
While certain top leaders may be associated with authoritarian control, spiritual manipulation, or the misuse of doctrines like submission and covering, it does not mean that every leader within that movement or denomination necessarily acts in the same way. Leadership styles depend on:
- Individual personalities: Some leaders may naturally lean toward control, while others may embody a more humble, servant-leader approach.
- Local context: The way doctrine is applied can vary from church to church, even if they are under the same larger movement or affiliation.
- Theological convictions: Some leaders may interpret their role as a spiritual overseer very differently, focusing more on pastoral care, humility, and the biblical model of servant leadership (Matthew 20:25-28).
2. Leadership Influence and Modeling
That said, it is fair to say that when top leaders in a movement model controlling or authoritarian behavior, it can influence others who follow them. This happens through:
- Imitation of style: Lower-level leaders, congregants, or those affiliated with the movement may mimic the behavior they see in top leadership, assuming that this is the correct or biblical way to lead.
- Doctrinal alignment: If the top leaders teach certain doctrines—like submission to authority or the need for “spiritual covering”—in a way that fosters control, others under their influence may adopt these practices without fully understanding the potential for abuse or the distortion of biblical principles.
- Organizational culture: Movements often have a cultural ethos or a set of unspoken rules that spread through their networks. If a movement’s culture leans toward heavy-handed authority, that culture may filter down to those who affiliate with or are under their umbrella of influence.
3. Top Leaders’ Responsibility for Their Followers
It’s important to recognize that top leaders in a movement might not always be fully aware of how individuals in their network (pastors, elders, followers) apply their teachings on the ground. However, leaders bear some moral responsibility for the culture they create and the teachings they promote:
- Direct Responsibility: If leaders teach or model abusive behaviors directly—such as divining spirits, distant accusations, or heavy control over submission—then they are directly responsible for the negative effects on those under their care.
- Indirect Responsibility: If leaders allow a culture of suspicion, fear, or control to develop within their movement without confronting or correcting it, they still hold some accountability for the damage caused. They might not actively control every individual, but by promoting or failing to address these practices, they contribute to the problem.
4. Variability in Practice
It’s also crucial to recognize that some individuals within these movements might be leading with genuine biblical integrity and compassion, choosing to reject the more authoritarian tendencies they see around them. Just because someone is affiliated with a movement does not mean they are automatically guilty of the same abuses happening in other parts of the movement. Many leaders and pastors work hard to:
- Build relational trust with their congregations.
- Operate with transparency, accountability, and humility.
- Avoid the pitfalls of spiritual abuse, false accusations, or authoritarian control.
Conclusion
While it would be an overgeneralization to claim that every top leader in these movements engages in control or spiritual abuse, the influence and teachings of top leadership play a significant role in shaping the practices of their followers. If the doctrine or leadership style at the top promotes unhealthy control, even indirectly, it can lead to widespread abuse throughout the movement. Leaders, both at the top and in local settings, have a responsibility to ensure that their teachings and behaviors are grounded in biblical principles of humility, love, and mutual accountability.
Therefore, while not every leader is guilty, the overall culture and doctrinal teaching within the movement can lead to the proliferation of controlling practices, and top leaders bear responsibility for setting the tone and addressing abuses within their spheres of influence.
The issues you raised regarding accusations, doctrinal misuse, and potentially false teaching within certain Christian groups (like Levitical Patriarchal teachings, NAR, Christian International, and some Charismatic and Pentecostal movements) can be understood as stemming from a few core doctrines or practices that have been distorted or taken to harmful extremes.
Here are the main doctrinal issues and practices behind these accusations:
1. Covering and Submission Teaching
One of the most common threads among these movements is the concept of spiritual covering and submission, which is often linked to the Shepherding Movement from the 1970s. The idea is that believers need to be under the direct spiritual authority of a pastor, leader, or “apostle” in order to be in the right standing with God. While biblical passages like Hebrews 13:17 mention submitting to leadership, the problem arises when these teachings lead to spiritual abuse, unhealthy control, and manipulation.
- Accusations Based on This Doctrine: The idea of submission often becomes a tool for controlling individuals or accusing those who don’t conform to the leadership’s ideas. Leaders may label people as rebellious, “uncovered,” or Jezebels for questioning or not submitting to their authority. This can result in false accusations of being a “witch” or “dangerous” if a person doesn’t conform to leadership or refuses to be under the so-called spiritual covering.
- False Teaching and Misuse: The Bible calls for mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21) and emphasizes servant leadership (Mark 10:42-45). However, these movements distort submission into authoritarian control, which leads to spiritual abuse when people are told they can only access God’s blessing or protection by being under a specific human authority.
2. Anti-Women Accusations (Misuse of the Jezebel Spirit)
Many of the accusations aimed at women in these movements seem to stem from the misapplication of the “Jezebel spirit” doctrine, which can be used to target, control, and silence women. Historically, “Jezebel” has been associated with manipulation, control, or sexual immorality, but in some modern contexts, this label is often misused to accuse strong, independent women or those who do not comply with a church’s leadership structure.
- Accusations Based on This Doctrine: Women who are seen as outspoken, assertive, or who do not adhere to traditional gender roles may be labeled as “Jezebels,” especially if they challenge male leadership. This also can extend to women in leadership positions being accused of usurping authority or acting outside their “biblical role.”
- False Teaching and Misuse: This doctrine misinterprets the story of Jezebel in 1 Kings and Revelation 2:20, applying it broadly to any woman who doesn’t conform to a patriarchal vision of submission. The Bible does not endorse gender-based accusations or the silencing of women but speaks of equality in Christ (Galatians 3:28) and gifts for both men and women (Acts 2:17).
3. Divining Spirits and False Discernment
The practice of “divining spirits” or assuming knowledge about individuals’ spiritual state without personal interaction is another problematic issue. Leaders claim to discern the presence of demonic activity, witchcraft, or sin without ever speaking to or relating to the individuals they accuse. This type of behavior is often found in charismatic circles where prophetic gifts or “words of knowledge” are misused.
- Accusations Based on This Doctrine: Far-off accusations (like the “witch lists” you mentioned) can occur when leaders believe they have received spiritual insight or revelation about someone’s character or spiritual status, leading to false accusations of witchcraft, Jezebel spirit, or other demonic influences without any direct interaction or relational context.
- False Teaching and Misuse: This is a misuse of the gift of discernment (1 Corinthians 12:10), as true biblical discernment requires personal engagement, humility, and restoration (Galatians 6:1). What is happening in these cases is often more akin to spiritual suspicion or control, where leaders use the language of prophecy or discernment to manipulate or cast doubt on individuals.
4. Cult-Like Practices
In some cases, the overemphasis on submission, control, and prophetic authority in these movements leads to cult-like practices. A cult-like group often has:
- Centralized authority that is unquestionable.
- Heavy-handed control over the personal lives of followers.
- Exclusivity, where those outside the group are viewed as inferior, dangerous, or “not under covering.”
- Accusations Based on This Doctrine: Leaders who reject healthy accountability and elevate themselves as “apostles” or “prophets” can create environments where any disagreement is seen as rebellion against God’s anointed. This leads to accusations of witchcraft, Jezebel spirits, or rebellion against those who don’t fully submit.
- False Teaching and Misuse: This is in clear violation of biblical principles that promote servant leadership (John 13:12-17), mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21), and the priesthood of all believers (1 Peter 2:9). The authoritarianism found in such movements contradicts the heart of Jesus’ teaching about the equality and freedom of believers in Him.
5. Found in Other Ministry Styles
These accusatory practices and doctrines of control, spiritual suspicion, and authoritarianism are not limited to one particular group. They can be found across many ministry styles:
- NAR (New Apostolic Reformation): The emphasis on prophetic authority and apostolic leadership can lead to far-off accusations, as leaders claim to have insight or revelation without relational accountability.
- Shepherding Movement: As mentioned earlier, this movement promoted spiritual oversight in ways that became controlling and abusive, with unchecked authority and demands for submission.
- Christian International and some Pentecostal/Charismatic circles: Prophetic ministry, when misused, can become a tool for spiritual manipulation, leading to accusations and false discernment.
Summing Up False Teachings and Abuses
- Covering and Submission Doctrine: Often misused to control others and claim authority that isn’t biblically grounded. Accusations of rebellion are common when someone refuses to submit to a particular leader.
- Misapplication of the Jezebel Spirit: Wrongfully used to silence or control women, particularly those who are strong or assertive. This leads to accusations based on gender biases rather than real issues.
- Divining Spirits: Leaders making accusations from a distance, claiming to discern spiritual truths without engaging in biblical confrontation or relationship. This is unbiblical and abusive.
- Cult-Like Practices: Heavy emphasis on authority, submission, and exclusivity can lead to groups exhibiting cult-like control and manipulation over members.
Dr T asks Chat GPT AI:
Would any of the Patrician, ongoing perceiver ‘fruits’ (mainly the ones discussed in this present series Articles 1-4) and here…surely by mistake…might these be a form of “grieving holy spirit” blaspheming the holy spirit ” touching God’s anointed (in the pews, or around an area) and similar. However, to each wondering reader, it’s “ONLY IF ANY SHOE FITS”..
Chat GPT AI respectfully answers: