Question: What about the growing "spiritual warfare" teaching that...Christians can take over ...

Question: What about the growing "spiritual warfare" teaching that by "binding" in the name of the Lord the "territorial spirit" controlling a city Christians can take over that city for God?

Response: Such an idea has no biblical basis, either by precept or example. Yes, "the prince of the kingdom of Persia: prevented the angel Gabriel for three weeks from coming to Daniel (Dn 10:12-13). Daniel, however, was seeking prophetic insight--not to "bind" the "territorial spirit" over Persia. Nor did Gabriel instruct him to wage such warfare. Gabriel's mission was to inform Daniel of last-days events affecting Israel (v 14)--information which the "prince of Persia" tried to hinder. There is no hint that "binding" this demon would have delivered Persia from Satanic influence or that Gabriel's victory over this demon (with the help of Michael the Archangel) had any effect upon the spiritual climate in Persia or aided in the salvation of Persians.

Paul never tried to "bind territorial spirits" in bringing the gospel to the world of his day, so why should we? And although the apostles "turned the world upside down," there is no hint that a single city was ever "taken for God," as Wimber, Paulk, Hayford, Frangipane, Lea, and so many others are promising. In Corinth, for example, where Paul spent 18 months, God gave him special protection and blessing because He had "much people in this city" (Acts:18:9-10 [9] Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: [10] For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city.
See All...). The issue was not to deliver Corinth, but to call a company of believers out of it. Nor did Paul's success change the destiny of Corinth--or of any other city or nation.