Discernment, Disagreement, and the Holy Spirit

[Bootstrap]

Sudsy posted this in another thread. This thread is to discuss some of the questions he has raised here and in other threads.

1. Should believers discuss ethical questions even when we disagree?
2. How do believers determine what is right? What does it mean if believers disagree?
3. What role does the Holy Spirit play in our common discernment? Discernment as individuals?
4. How do we approach Scripture together in our discernment? Or as individuals?

An observation of mine regarding our decisions as believers -

This and various other threads all seem to me to come back to a common issue about how to rightly know what Jesus wants us to do.

I often don't get much support for referring to being personally guided by the Holy Spirit and I think I understand why some don't talk in this sense. Jesus said that His sheep know His voice and follow Him. The voice of another they will not follow. And this is problematic as we have come to various different conclusion on what Jesus is saying to us through the Holy Spirit and we don't want to think that perhaps we are not one of His sheep.

Some say that if we are hearing the Holy Spirit guide us this guidance will not contradict what the Scriptures say. On the surface, I would agree. But then we find Scriptures that support what we hear as our guidance and another believer finds Scriptures also to support their guidance, yet they are opposites.

So, what I hear mostly is a battle of human reasonings to determine which have the most weight in our decision making. Seems the more educated folks are, the more they tend to trust their human reasonings, imo. The voice of the Spirit is not talked about much. Perhaps it is thought that our thinking is automatically under the Spirit's influence as He lives in us. But is that correct ?

This can be it's own thread but it might help to discuss sometime just how we get our guidance from the Holy Spirit and how much prayer, scripture and our own thinking is involved. One thing that early Anabaptists emphasized in their beginning was the need for the Holy Spirit guidance and not just the written Word only. I wonder if, due to perhaps the extreme practises of some Christians regarding the Holy Spirit, that Anabaptists are leaning more on their human scriptural guidance more today than the guidance of the Holy Spirit and do not seek and listen to that 'still small voice'.

[Bootstrap]

I think it's really important to be immersed in Scripture and to be part of a Christian community that discerns together by the Holy Spirit.

But Scripture is often very concerned about things that don't come up in today's society, like who is circumcised and who is not, and does not directly address some of the moral decisions we make today, such as whether to get a Covid-19 shot.

Hebrews 5 tells us this:

You need milk, not solid food, for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.

Distinguishing right from wrong requires constant practice. It is rooted in the Word of God, but discernment is something we learn by doing, together, in the Holy Spirit. And that often involves uncomfortable conversations. It certainly did in the New Testament.

[Sudsy]

Sudsy posted this in another thread. This thread is to discuss some of the questions he has raised here and in other threads.

1. Should believers discuss ethical questions even when we disagree ?
2. How do believers determine what is right? What does it mean if believers disagree?
3. What role does the Holy Spirit play in our common discernment? Discernment as individuals?
4. How do we approach Scripture together in our discernment? Or as individuals?

Just to be clear, these are questions that you have assembled from what you believe I have raised in other threads.

For an opener, #1 my answer would be 'yes'. I would suggest references to scriptures be used wherever possible.

[Bootstrap]

Just to be clear, these are questions that you have assembled from what you believe I have raised in other threads.

No, these are just basic questions I ask about discernment and disagreement.

For an opener, #1 my answer would be 'yes'. I would suggest references to scriptures be used wherever possible.

Yes, I agree. Scripture does not directly address some things we discuss, though.

[Sudsy]

I think it's really important to be immersed in Scripture and to be part of a Christian community that discerns together by the Holy Spirit.

But Scripture is often very concerned about things that don't come up in today's society, like who is circumcised and who is not, and does not directly address some of the moral decisions we make today, such as whether to get a Covid-19 shot.

Hebrews 5 tells us this:

You need milk, not solid food, for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.

Distinguishing right from wrong requires constant practice. It is rooted in the Word of God, but discernment is something we learn by doing, together, in the Holy Spirit. And that often involves uncomfortable conversations. It certainly did in the New Testament.

I agree there are specific moral decisions we make today that are not explicitly addressed in scripture.

A question regarding communal discernment - if one group of believers discerns together, for instance, that a certain style of headcovering is required and another group of believers discern together that a cloth headcovering is not required and both refer to certain scriptures as their foundation for their belief, then who is being guided by the Holy Spirit and who is not ? I don't see where communal discernment has resulted in more unity in the Church of Christ but rather has resulted often in more division. And we could apply this to all kinds of issues such as getting Covid shots or not.

What do you think causes this to occur ? Which group is the most spiritually mature ? Which group is really Spirit lead ?

[Bootstrap]

A question regarding communal discernment - if one group of believers discerns together, for instance, that a certain style of headcovering is required and another group of believers discern together that a cloth headcovering is not required and both refer to certain scriptures as their foundation for their belief, then who is being guided by the Holy Spirit and who is not?

To me, communal discernment usually works best when we ask God what he is calling our particular community to.

One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

We need to take that seriously.

Of course, that doesn't mean that EVERYTHING is relative. There are some very clear commands in Scripture. But often, people seem to be treating some applications of Scripture as though they were direct commands of God, and sometimes even political talking points and political affiliations can be treated that way.

The New Testament is mostly about what the New Testament is mostly about. We should make that our focus.

I don't see where communal discernment has resulted in more unity in the Church of Christ but rather has resulted often in more division. And we could apply this to all kinds of issues such as getting Covid shots or not.

I don't think that's a problem with communal discernment, I suspect it's often a problem with self-righteousness and judgmentalism. We should ask ourselves this question: Is this the kind of thing people judged Jesus for, or is it the kind of thing Jesus judged the scribes and Pharisees for? Taking that question seriously might change the way we seek the Kingdom of God.

[Sudsy]

A question regarding communal discernment - if one group of believers discerns together, for instance, that a certain style of headcovering is required and another group of believers discern together that a cloth headcovering is not required and both refer to certain scriptures as their foundation for their belief, then who is being guided by the Holy Spirit and who is not?

To me, communal discernment usually works best when we ask God what he is calling our particular community to.

Could you give an example of what you mean by a 'calling our particular community to' ? Not sure I understand what you mean here.

One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

We need to take that seriously.

But isn't this the opposite of communal discernment and promotes individual, personal convictions on Christian practise ?

Of course, that doesn't mean that EVERYTHING is relative. There are some very clear commands in Scripture. But often, people seem to be treating some applications of Scripture as though they were direct commands of God, and sometimes even political talking points and political affiliations can be treated that way.

The New Testament is mostly about what the New Testament is mostly about. We should make that our focus.

I don't see where communal discernment has resulted in more unity in the Church of Christ but rather has resulted often in more division. And we could apply this to all kinds of issues such as getting Covid shots or not.

I don't think that's a problem with communal discernment, I suspect it's often a problem with self-righteousness and judgmentalism. We should ask ourselves this question: Is this the kind of thing people judged Jesus for, or is it the kind of thing Jesus judged the scribes and Pharisees for? Taking that question seriously might change the way we seek the Kingdom of God.

[Bootstrap]

To me, communal discernment usually works best when we ask God what he is calling our particular community to.

Could you give an example of what you mean by a 'calling our particular community to' ? Not sure I understand what you mean here.

A particular church, a particular ministry, a family, a small group ...

One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

We need to take that seriously.

But isn't this the opposite of communal discernment and promotes individual, personal convictions on Christian practise ?

As I understand Romans, it was written to a city that had various small house churches, with different teachings and beliefs, and one of the things Paul was trying to do was to get them to see themselves as God's Kingdom, together, including both Jews and Gentiles, people from various ethnic groups, etc.

I can't prove this, but I think of that passage as describing the practices of house churches who ate meat offered to idols and house churches who did not. Of course, this might refer to tolerance within a given house church, I can't prove it one way or another. But even there, allowing more than one practice can often be wise, while still discerning what is right and best. I think that's what we see in the New Testament. Within reason, of course.

[Sudsy]

I grew up in a church with certain unwritten but expected moderation practises. These were interpretations of what it means to dress in moderation and for instance, most jewelry and face makeup was thought to be inappropriate while a broach was not. Dresses must be below the knee and not sleeveless. Who came up with these expectations I don't know. Whether there was a communal discernment on these, I don't know.

I'm curious as to how 'conservative' groups come up with what is moderate dress and what is not. Is a practise brought before the whole church and voted on as communal discernment or how does this work ? Is there a certain percent of votes required or does it require full agreement ? Would this be a way that Covid shots or not would be handled ?