Thanks for feedback. I agree with you eaglewings that the danger is to get too black and white about it re devils in the wardrobe, under the bed etc. But ime this 'warfare' is very real. I lived in africa for a time and there is no question that a spiritual dimension exists that does not, shall we say, represent the good guys: very obvious manifestations that could not be put down to anything other than spiritual in origin.
We tend to think we are too civilised in the west, don't stick pins in dolls etc, and that kind of stuff is not relevant here. I disagree. I also have a friend who has become very involved in a ministry, based in \australia, whose central message is demonic possession etc etc, based predominantly on 'portholes' that come through freemasonry. It is obvious, to me at least, that this ministry is cultish, not least by my now ex (her choice) friend's complete change of character and commitments. She has cut off everyone who doesn't follow this ministry and spends all her money getting to australia as often as possible to sit at the feet of the teacher, neglecting her family in the process. I guess you could say you know something by its fruits.
I respect Derek Prince and take seriously what he has (had) to say. He is unequivocal that there is such a thing as 'demonising' (again, distinction is made between possession and oppression), with many examples, and there is certainly evidence in my life and those around me that that could be the case. However, I would like to know more about it but not know too much iyswim. There is very little about demonic oppression in the bible and, I assume, that is because we don't need to know too much about it, it's not our business to know too much. As you say, madhair, the central need-to-know is the blood of Jesus, what he paid for; that his is the name above all names, which includes any spiritual personalities causing trouble "stealing, killing, destroying". He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross - that's done and complete. I sometimes wonder if the 'fight' is akin to a legal battle: 'they' try it on, we say no, you can't do that, that's illegal, get off/out. In the name of Jesus ie that is the authority, not our own.
So I would approach this circumspectly. I heard once of a ministry which got into 'casting out demons' in a big way and were astonished that ever more lurid manifestations tipped up at every meeting. The ministry came to the conclusion that narcissism was at play, fame and recognition craved by the spiritual 'personalities' making an appearance, and prompty stopped hosting their party. That's a thought. Derek Prince also tells the story of a spiritual 'personality' who insisted on being called by its right name and made an enormous fuss about it.
But now I'm going out on a limb... However, I do believe this (demonising) is very real and to ignore it is a mistake, but to give it too much attention is also a mistake. Deal with it as a matter of course could be the answer - though churches would have to believe it is a contemporary reality in order to deal with it. And many don't, which is a tragedy imo. I am reminded of the example of the woman bent double, oppressed by a 'spirit' that Jesus cast out. I know a woman like this, who is relatively young and healthy but in an alarming domestic set-up with an alarmingly spooky husband, and myriad problems in the children. It could follow that there is some demonic activity going on in that situation ie the answer could be simple, straightforward. Personally, I would like to see people set free and am not fussy about how that is accomplished - why not by utilising the tremendous authority that broke the power of evil? Is that the (or a) fight we're in, to literally call on that authority to set people free?
I'm also reminded of eg a woman who lost her leg in an accident, and it transpires that her mother had also lost her leg years before but in different circumstances. What's going on there - was it a tragic coincidence, or did the daughter somehow psychologically mirror her mother: and, anyhow, why is psychology perceived as the final authority, the legitimate and accepted route, or root, of difficult-to-explain phenomena or 'coincidences'.?