Is "spiritual" discernment an objective judgment of the mind, or a subjective intuition of the spirit?
By: Gregory Koukl
I had a challenge from a friend a couple days ago that I've heard many times. Maybe it's been leveled at you, too. It has to do with spiritual discernment. Am I in my "head" too much when I do spiritual discernment, and not enough "in the Spirit"? Am I discerning with my mind - with reason and rationality - and not discerning with my heart ? That was her question.
Am I in my "head" too much when I do spiritual discernment, and not enough "in the Spirit"? Am I discerning with my mind - with reason and rationality - and not discerning with my heart?
It got me thinking. Since I'm involved in offering a reasonable defense for the faith and advocating clear thinking on critical issues, since I'm skeptical of those whose religion is almost entirely emotional/intuitive, people have challenged me that I'm only "half there" not using all my spiritual faculties and therefore am at risk of running into error.
"Koukl, you're just in your head too much," they suggest. "You're too left-brained when it comes to spiritual things. You're too logical, too reasonable. You don't depend enough on your heart to discern the spiritual realm. Yes you're using your mind, but what about your spirit? Why do you always trust in your own thinking instead of what the Spirit is saying about something?"
These statements imply that somehow I'm not doing a full-blooded assessment of things because I'm only using half of my machinery. My analysis should include the subjective, not just the objective.
This kind of critique assumes a couple of things. First, it assumes that there are two types of spiritual assessment. One is a rational assessment, a kind of theological head-trip. The other is a subjective, intuitive skill that some call discernment, in which we sense deep within us that something is on target or that something is amiss.
Second, it implies that the subjective, intuitive analysis is more advanced and more accurate. It is a "higher method," a more tuned-in capability. It's a spiritual assessment and not just a mental, rational assessment. It's an ability to "hear what the Spirit has to say."
People who make these kinds of comments generally are skeptical of the rational to begin with. It strikes them as being fleshly. It's what Koukl "brings to the table," so to speak, his mind, his thinking, his own rationality, his own ideas. And all of these smack of "the ways of the world," as opposed to going to God and letting God do the analysis for us.
This distinction is incredibly pervasive in Evangelical circles, so much so that some groups have even given a name to it. Some of the so-called Word-Faith teachers distinguish between what they call sensate knowledge --that which you learn with your mind as a result of study and analysis- -and revelational knowledge --that which is mediated directly to you in the spiritual realm. You have this learned stuff you get with your head, and you have this spiritual stuff you get from somewhere "out there," from the spiritual realm.
As I did a mental inventory of the New Testament, though, it suddenly occurred to me that I couldn't think of any verses at all that supported the notion of discernment as subjective and intuitive.
The second type is definitely better, the argument goes. You need to develop the capability to learn things spiritually so you can really get the deep truth, because the sensate stuff is distorted by the flesh. At least this is implied when you hear these kinds of assessments. And isn't it really true that Evangelicals trust more in their "spirits" than in their minds when it comes to spiritual things?
When I was less than a year old in Christ, I went to a coffeehouse in the basement of a church in Pacific Palisades in California. It was so long ago that Keith Green was not even a Christian yet (for those of you who remember that fine Christian musician who died in 1982 in a plane crash). Keith was there that night playing with Randy Stonehill, who eventually was to lead Keith to Christ. But Keith wasn't a believer that night.
As I entered the door that evening, my friend Joyce paused and put her hand to her chest as if she felt something. "Gosh, I sense that something is wrong. I feel this check in my spirit," she said. And I thought, I can't wait till I get to the point in my spiritual growth where I can know things directly in the spiritual realm, and have this sixth sense and discern things like Joyce just did.
It's 23 years later and I still haven't gotten that sixth sense. Instead, I use my mind. I don't say that as a concession, like I got the last place prize. I think it's biblical. The only way to know if I'm correct, though, is to ask the questions, "Which way is really right? Which is best? Do we discern with our minds, or do we need a sixth sense for optimum spiritual discernment?"
When I was challenged this week, my first response was, "I bet if you do a scriptural analysis, you'll find there are more verses that have to do with an objective assessment than those for a subjective one." I figured that if there really are two different ways of discernment, no one could fault me for being rational if I had scriptural support, especially if more verses supported a objective method than a subjective one.
As I did a mental inventory of the New Testament, though, it suddenly occurred to me that I couldn't think of any verses at all that supported the notion of discernment as subjective and intuitive. None came to mind, so I had to do a little searching.
I went to my NASB Bible Master program and started looking up words, starting with the word "discern." There are only two verses in the New Testament that even use the word. In Matthew 16:3 Jesus says that in the morning, "...[you say] 'There will be a storm today, for the sky is red and threatening.' Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times?"
Jesus was talking about looking at particular signs - the appearance of the sky - and drawing conclusions about what the weather will be like. That's an objective, not a subjective, assessment.
The point is, when the Bible talks about discernment - when it talks about assessing spiritual things - it's talking about a rational assessment based on objective criterion.
Hebrews 5:14 chastised those who ought to have been teachers of the Word, eating meat instead of drinking milk. Then it says, "...but solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil." So the discernment here is not subjective; it's objective. It's using the knowledge and practice of the truth of the Scriptures to develop an ability to objectively discern right from wrong.
Then I looked up the word "discernment." There's only one use of it, Philippians 1:9-10. It says, "...this I pray, that your love may abound still more and more in real knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve the things that are excellent, in order to be sincere and blameless until the day of Christ."
Here, discernment is coupled with knowledge resulting in a morally excellent life. Discernment is knowing what's right and what's wrong. We get that from the Scriptures, as Hebrews 5:14 points out. Sounds like an objective assessment to me.
Then I looked up the word "test." There are fifteen verses that use this word, but only one that applies to our issue. In I John 5:1-3 it says: "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because there are many false prophets gone out into the world." Now we're getting warmer, I thought, testing the spirits. Surely now we're moving into subjective.
Not so. Read again. The next verse says, "By this you know the spirit of God. Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God." Hmm...not a subjective test here, but an objective one, once again.
First Corinthians 12:10 talks about spiritual gifts. Here we might be on to something, because distinguishing of spirits is a spiritual gift. There is no hint of objective standards here; there's also no hint of subjective standards. In fact, what's curious about this verse is that it doesn't say anything else in this passage, nor anywhere else, about what it means to distinguish spirits.
I'm inclined to believe that since it's a spiritual gift, it leans more toward a subjective ability, because if this were referring to an objective way to distinguish spirits, we all could do it, and we wouldn't need the gift. So here seems to be one verse that lends itself to a subjective sense of discernment, but it's not something that everybody has, only those who are gifted. If I'm not gifted in this way, then there's no point in me trying to distinguish spirits subjectively, because I have different gifts.
Next I looked up the word "correct," but there were no entries. I looked up the word "correcting" and found II Timothy 2:25, "...with gentleness, correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth." Here the correcting has to do with having a conflict with people who disagree with you. The verse above it says, "...not being argumentative, but gracious when wronged, with gentleness correcting..." Once again we have an objective test. We see that somebody is doing something wrong and we offer correction. No intuitive pondering here or getting into a spiritual twilight zone. Rather a correction "leading to the knowledge of the truth." The truth is objective.
Here's my point. Is it true that Koukl is too much into his head, using his reason to assess spiritual things, and is not into the Spirit enough? Only if the Bible teaches that we must balance the two. But when I asked the question, "Where does the Bible teach such a thing?" I found no such teaching. I was unable to produce any scriptural support except for I Corinthians 12:10 about the distinguishing of spirits, which is a spiritual gift I have not been given, apparently, and which only a few have.
The point is, when the Bible talks about discernment - when it talks about assessing spiritual things - it's talking about a rational assessment based on objective criterion. You can't be "too much in your head" when it comes to spiritual discernment. Using your head is spiritual discernment, if you're using the truth properly.
Hi Ella:waving:thanks for your kind welcome, and as always for your wisdom.
I have met a lot of carnal christians, sorry to judge my brothers and sisters in Christ, but I believe some are saved like you say, but not baptized in the Holy Spirit, whereby they do not truly give up the sin nature and are double-minded.
Jesus's last prayer was for us to be one with the Father, just as he is one with Him. Carnal christians have not crucified their sin nature, therefore, the Holy Spirit cannot habitate within them because He is Holy. The word says to quench not the Holy Spirit, but to allow Him to have His way, otherwise, the Holy Spirit is grieved and sadly departs.
Pro 2:1 My son, if thou wilt receive my words, And lay up my commandments with thee;
Pro 2:2 So as to incline thine ear unto wisdom, And apply thy heart to understanding;
Pro 2:3 Yea, if thou cry after discernment, And lift up thy voice for understanding;
Pro 2:4 If thou seek her as silver, And search for her as for hid treasures:
Pro 2:5 Then shalt thou understand the fear of Jehovah, And find the knowledge of God.
Pro 2:6 For Jehovah giveth wisdom; Out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding:
We also discern with our eyes, our ears, and make the CHOICES through our spirits as to what to do or path to take or what is right or wrong, good or evil... But it is ONLY the Holy Spirit who communicates this to us in our spirit to perceive these things.
Its either our spirit in control over our minds, or our minds in control over our spirit...
Hey Angel:hearts: Shalom, I always enjoy you and I am so glad you're back with us. :yay:
Angel and Elsiah as I'm sure you have read their posts, have also joined us (and Jude and I ) the women on the forum, along with a few other godly women who pop in every so often.:applause::applause::glow:
You know, if anyone knows anything about systematic theology which John Calivn was known to use to try and understand GOD, and those who followed him who called themselves Calvinists, continue to use to understand a rationalize the Word of God instead of the Holy Spirit,... you will know that this article James ahs poste is a clear pure case, if you read the article, it is the perfect examle of how systematic theology is used in the Calvinsit trying to understand scripture and what God means in His word and how to apply it.
What they DO NOT UNDERSTAND IS THAT GOD NOR IS HIS WORD A SYSTEM THAT CAN BE ANALYZED... BECAUSE IT IS SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED AND REVEALED TO MAN THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT and placed in man's spirit for wisdom and understanding and to apply for daily living.
Calvinists THINk the Holy Spirit is NOT enough to bring them into knowledge and understanding of the word and God, because they HAVE NOT BEEN BAPTIZED (REGENERATED) BY THE HOLY SPIRIT, so they really have no spiritual knowledge or understanding of God's word.
The reason why this dude does not understand with spiritual discernment and has to used all his reseacrh of words and foolisness, IS because he has not been born again of the Holy Spirit of God to KNOW the power of discernment. So he wouldn't know how God communicates with man from God Spirit to man's spirit... this is why he thinks doiscernment is of the head and mind... WRONG:nahnah::excited:
And this was my point in my other post about Calivn he did not understand God's Word spiritually for himself, so he tried to FIGURE out God and the scriptures under HIS OWN wisdom and knowledge and understanding by sysmatically techniques.
So what do you have?... CALVINISM AND PEOPLE WHO FOLLOW HIS WRITINGS WHO CALL THEMSELVES CALVINSITS, only bcause THEY have not read God's Word for themselvs and depended upon the empowerment of the Holy Spiirit of God to TEACH AND LEAD THEM INTO ALL THINGS CONCERNING GOD AND HIS WORD, and bring them inot the knowledge of Jesus Christ and the pwoer of the Holy Ghost and His works within the believer. Christians follow the Doctrines of Christ this is why we are called CHRISTIANS... Calvinist follow the doctrines of John Calvin, this is why they are called CALVINISTS...
They CALL AND ARE IDENTIFIED AS CALVINISTS, NOT AS CHIRSTIANS WHO ARE FOLLOWERS OF THE DOCRTRINE OF JESUS CHRIST, althought they SAY they believe in Jesus Christ, but they deny the WORD of God, and are followers of the doctrine and teahcings of JOHN CALVIN who is their messiah... and not that of Jesus Christ who died for their sins on the cross...
I have yet to hear a Calvinists say they are FOLLOWERS OF JESUS CHRIST... they will confess they believe in Jesus Christ, but to be a followers of Jesus Christ, is to believe everything Jesus has spoken, and what God speaks about Jesus and His doctrinem and not what Calvin has written. Plus, much of what they believe Calvin did not say, it those who took his work and wrote what they THOUGHT HE WAS SAYING, AND GAVE CALVIN CREDIT... Calvin did say a lot of the foolishness that is given to his name... incuding the Five Points, others took his notes and wrote them and assigned the Five Pints to his name from his thoughts he left behind on paper...:nahnah:
Systematic theology is their SPIRITUAL DOWNFAULT, so they deny the truth as God has spoken, and understand the scriptures as Calivn and Calivn's teachers explain and interprets them, and not from divine REVELATION from the Holy Ghost!
Is that what it's about for you girls? Winning the round? It sounds like you think winning "spiritual" arguments makes you the better or "right" Christian. That is a shame and very prideful and fleshly if I must say.
I have NEVER heard a "Calvinist" say he was a follower of Calvin before being a follower of Christ. Never. If I did, I would rebuke him. That is absurd. I am also sure YOU have never heard that from them either and that you are using that as a deceitful argument in hopes that the mud will stick to the wall as you scamper away from having to logically and biblically refute their biblical expositions.
Why do you guys squirm away from having to logically answer the Word of God? Is it because you have higher revelation than the rest of us and therefore are not willing to lower yourself to our "human" standards of interputation or is it because God's Word does not fit your emotions and feelings on a particular subject so you choose to speak above it loudly enough hoping that the shouting will detract us from the subject? I do not know what road you all are taking, but I pray that you would all faithfully study God's Word with no presuppositions of your own or from your teachers and that you would take God at His Word and His Word only.
Sorry to be so blunt, but I know of no other way to clarify what I'm saying without watering it down and making it "politically" correct which is a disservice to all of us.
At Ella :ROFL: nice try to tear up those evil calvinist and spew them out of your mouth as if you were god. Right after you go and post on my last thread Jesus is the life of the believer.
@1newguy, before you go ripping on my sister for saying something about winning a round, are you familure with the term debate? Do you realize that whether or not we call it a debate that is what all these threads are? Do you realize that in a debate there is always a winner and a loser?
And I want to ask you something, are you taking God at his Word when you say all does not mean all?
I mean really that is what is absurd,I will tellyou likeI told James
You all (the 3 of you clvinists on here) are always spouting off about the Sovergnity of God, but then you say things like God doesnt reveal things to people today, REALLY he is sovergin isnt He?If He wants to he can and will and does!
However if The Lord reveals something or speaks something to someones heart it is always always always in line with scripture!
I am gonna say what I have said over and over and over again and nobody has yet to adress it but the biggest problem I have with calvinisim or whatever you call it is that they say we can not or do =not have a choice that If God sets his sights on us (any member of the human race) then we have no choice in the matter we are saved and that is it!
and we do not posses the ability to reject Him if he calls that is what seems so abusrd to me! And you alls resoning behind this is God os totaly sovergin but if you say God can not gives us the opportunity to willingly accept Him or reject him then that is not completly sovergin because then what you are saying is God cant give us a choice! But if he is completly sovergin then he can give us the choice! At the risk of sounding redundant I will say it again, me having within my ability to reject God when his spirit draws me and convicts me, my ability to refuse and reject Him and reject salcvaton in no way takes away from His soverginty! That is a very small mided way of looking at it! And further more calviism and its doctrines are based ona hand full of scriptures taken out of context such as romans chapter 9 and then a doctrine has been bullt around those few scriptures and the other scriptures that refute the doctrine such as john 3:16 are twisted and "reformed" to line up with what they have decided those hand full of scriptures mean!
If God means ALL then He says ALL he is not waiting in a corner to strike us with lightening or bonk us on the head for being wrong, he also is not in the buisness of trying to confuse those that love Him! And saying that all really means some of all is confusing and crazyness!
When God speaks He is clear on what he is saying, He is not trying to trick us! Thats what I dont get about that doctrine! Why would anyone hink that God owuld say something ambiguous and tricky like that, the world is only some of all of the world??? :rolleyes: ???? All is just some of all:rolleyes:
Gee wiz that is just not the way the Lord works!
He is clear on everything else in His Word, so then why would he try to trick ME by saying all when He only means some?
@1newguy, I was just adding some humor to the mix because it helps when working through these weighty issues and I also think it is fun to have a healthy debate like my sister Elisha said, it was no personal attack on your manhood, brother.
@Elisha, high five, two thumbs up, giving credit where credit is due, thanks for sharing the truth in light of the gospel.
JESUS CHRIST is the revelation of the word, his life, his ministry and his works we need to look to him, seek his face, study his word, precept upon precept, line upon line.GLORY, HONOR and PRAISE to the KING of KINGS, LORD of LORDS, WONDERFUL COUNSELOR, let us celebrate the birth of our KING, EMMANUEL, G-d is with us.
Sorry if I offended anyone, Grace and Peace to all!
You did not offend me in the least, but I do appreciate your desire to apologize just in case. That is a proper and sweet spirit. I feel the same way when I post hoping not to personally offend anyone, but to try to clearly make my point for whatever its worth. Oh, I love the humor part too because we all can have a tendency to get so serious that we can sound very robotic and bullheaded. We could all possibly do a better job of making sure our humor is clearly known and not offensive.
Elisha,
I'm familiar with debates and understand the good that they do if carried out in a spirit of love with edification in mind. Yes, there are winners and losers in them, but the results are always very subjective.
The purpose of the debate is not to crush the opponent (like the world enjoys doing), but to logically and loving present your case so that the two sides of the disagreement can look at all the information given and hopefully make a better decision on the subject. No one is going to convince the opposing side to their beliefs if done in a mocking, I'm better than you tone. That just divides us.
I also realize that our emotions get involved and it can be very hard not to strike out at people in the heat of the moment. I am guilty as charged in that I am sure. Debates are certainly not for the weak at heart or for people who are overly emotional(growing, yet immature believer). It is too much, too fast for them and they easily forget to take what is actually said into consideration. It usually ends in name-calling and non-biblical uses of Scripture because its driven by emotions, the flesh.
I hope we can continue to debate these important topics in a spirit of humility and love, mixed with a little humor to keep them fun:)
I apologize to anyone I've personally offended asking for your forgiveness.
May you all be blessed during this wonderful time of celebrating our Saviors birth!
