Spiritual One-Upmanship

[fccool]

It's not very uncommon to see the ideas of Spiritual Superiority invoked in order to justify a certain belief, or to reject certain logic.

Generally, these take the shape of the following:

Quote:

Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. You don't understand it, because you lack the true guidance of the Holy Spirit.

The sub-text really translates into:

Quote:

I'm more spiritual than you are, that's why I understand this passage better.

Kind of brings back a thought from D.A. Carson on the subject:

Quote:

Almost twenty years ago I rode in a car with a fellow believer who relayed to me what the Lord had "told" him that morning in his quiet time. He had been reading the KJV of Matthew; and I perceived that not only had he misunderstood the archaic English, but also that the KJV at that place had unwittingly misrepresented the Greek text. I gently suggested there might be another way to understand the passage and summarized what I thought the passage was saying. The brother dismissed my view as impossible on the grounds that the Holy Spirit, who does not lie, told him the truth on this matter.

Being young and bold, I pressed on with my explanation of grammar, context, and translation, but was brushed off by a reference to 1 Corinthians 2:10b-15: "spiritual things must be spiritually discerned " which left little doubt about my status. Genuinely intrigued, I asked this brother what he would say if I put forward my interpretation, not on the basis of grammar and text, but on the basis that the Lord himself had given me the interpretation I was advancing. He was silent a long time, and then concluded, "I guess that would mean the Spirit says the Bible means different things to different people."

[CoAspen]

That just never happens on any of these forum threads....no, no!!

[Gerr]

Was Paul wrong? I rarely ever ever quote that text{if I ever did} in a discussion because it applies just as well to me as the other person. It has always bothered me though that people who read/study the same book, each claiming guidance from the Holy Spirit,could have contradicting conclusions.

[doug yowell]

Was Paul wrong? I rarely ever ever quote that text{if I ever did} in a discussion because it applies just as well to me as the other person. It has always bothered me though that people who read/study the same book, each claiming guidance from the Holy Spirit,could have contradicting conclusions.

Yes, which indicates that either one of them was right or both of them were wrong. In the case of the former it would validate Paul's point.

[joeb]

Was Paul wrong? I rarely ever ever quote that text{if I ever did} in a discussion because it applies just as well to me as the other person. It has always bothered me though that people who read/study the same book, each claiming guidance from the Holy Spirit,could have contradicting conclusions.

Would you be justified in quoting it to someone who doesn't believe in the work of the Holy Spirit? Would you be justified in quoting it to someone who doesn't believe you can have a personal relationship with God today? Would you be justified in quoting it to someone who places human logic above and beyond revealed truth?

[CoAspen]

>Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. You don't understand it, because you lack the true guidance of the Holy Spirit.

The sub-text really translates into:

Quote:

I'm more spiritual than you are, that's why I understand this passage better.<

Think about it. What is the intent of quoting something to someone when done over and over, constantly belaboring it? Is it done to prove we are right and the other wrong? The words the use prove much about our intent regardless of our often disclaimers.

[joeb]

>Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. You don't understand it, because you lack the true guidance of the Holy Spirit.

The sub-text really translates into:

Quote:

I'm more spiritual than you are, that's why I understand this passage better.<

Think about it. What is the intent of quoting something to someone when done over and over, constantly belaboring it? Is it done to prove we are right and the other wrong? The words the use prove much about our intent regardless of our often disclaimers.

I have no doubt that what you say can be true at some times. But, that doesn't mean the text is not true, and that in situations where Biblical statements are not accepted because human logic disagrees or someone says the statement is not true because they don't have the faith to believe it, then the text is quite applicable to the situation.

Look at Paul in Athens. Very few people there accepted his message because they chose to believe their own philosophy over the revealed will and message of God. They didn't believe or accept Paul's teachings because they didn't have the spiritual understanding. They felt no need for they were quite happy with who they were and with their philosophies.

Spiritual understanding comes from the influence and teaching of the Holy Spirit. If a person rejects the idea of the Holy Spirit and/or its ability to teach us and lead us into Biblical truth then it can't teach that person anything. It's by faith that we accept Him, so the lack of faith limits spiritual understanding.

[Gail]

>Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. You don't understand it, because you lack the true guidance of the Holy Spirit.

The sub-text really translates into:

Quote:

I'm more spiritual than you are, that's why I understand this passage better.<

Think about it. What is the intent of quoting something to someone when done over and over, constantly belaboring it? Is it done to prove we are right and the other wrong? The words the use prove much about our intent regardless of our often disclaimers.

The statement could be true... BUT if that is so, why the effort to try to make someone see something that only the Spirit could reveal?

Perhaps I'm just restating your answer...

[CoAspen]

Correct! Paul just moved on. How often is that done on the forums? Very few, you being one of the few! Thank you for that example.

[LifeHiscost]

I have no doubt that what you say can be true at some times. But, that doesn't mean the text is not true, and that in situations where Biblical statements are not accepted because human logic disagrees or someone says the statement is not true because they don't have the faith to believe it, then the text is quite applicable to the situation.

Look at Paul in Athens. Very few people there accepted his message because they chose to believe their own philosophy over the revealed will and message of God. They didn't believe or accept Paul's teachings because they didn't have the spiritual understanding. They felt no need for they were quite happy with who they were and with their philosophies.

Spiritual understanding comes from the influence and teaching of the Holy Spirit. If a person rejects the idea of the Holy Spirit and/or its ability to teach us and lead us into Biblical truth then it can't teach that person anything. It's by faith that we accept Him, so the lack of faith limits spiritual understanding.

[LifeHiscost]

The statement could be true... BUT if that is so, why the effort to try to make someone see something that only the Spirit could reveal?

Sometimes I forget the reality of that, Gail. Especially when I realize many others pay attention to advice that places little importance to the fact that God makes platform statements that can make the difference between redemption or perdition. And I wish to thank you for drawing my attention to the fact.

There is a way that seems right to a man, But its end is the way of death.Proverbs 16:25 NKJV

Some have a tendency to believe that if a person doesn't agree with them, it must mean they're not liked and they're being attacked.

God blesses!