On changed minds and thinking.

[gordon 2]

On changed minds and thinking--- the how to think soberly. Romans 12-3


"3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith."

It seems to me that Paul is indicating here how the believer is to think soberly. He is saying, don't forget when your thinking that your thinking needs to be "through" the very grace given to believers and also not to forget that God has dealt to every man ( in this case every believer) the measure of faith.

Why would it be important to the principle of thinking to keep in mind that to every man, or to every believer, God has dealt the measure of faith? Paul seem to say that some might think themselves highly than they ought to think, if they forget that God has dealt to every man the measure of faith--why?

There is today in the sciences, in their fact declarations and in declarations as to truth the discipline of peer review to provide for sensible thinking. Or in Journalism there is corroboration on reported facts.

I suggest that Paul seems to state that a believer's thinking cannot be left to opinions or editorials, but to facts that can be assesses by peers and corroborated especially because all believers have been dealt the measure of faith and all believers can process assessments through grace.


So why do believers today continue with understandings of the gospel that are almost the opposite one the other? Why are doctrines so different? Why are periodic revivals needed? Why does the study of scripture give open to new and dynamic doctrine concerning the gospel's contents, and gives birth to new christian communities, sects and denominations, not to mention dropouts from believer communities-- but who continue in the way as if this way of being is itself doctrinal?

I have some ideas. Spiritual belief gives over to our ways of social life, culture and economic life. When economic and social life is ailing to the point of affecting negatively dynamic social life ( upsetting it) to the point that the very needs of daily living are compromised then their might be thinking by believers in this way: there is something wrong with spiritual belief.

It might be easy therefore to understand or make an assessment that some will align thinking this way: Social injustice = equals errors in spiritual belief and at the expense of Paul's criteria of keeping in mind grace and that all believers have a measure of faith regards thinking and how to proceed as Christians.

I'm thinking of the example of the Peasant Wars in Europe right now for some reason and the peasant's social outlook with the implication on spiritual outlook. The Reformation was it brought about through this outlook? The institutional Church at this time had tremendous economic and social power. Was the thinking then on the right way to come to a positive outcome, ( which led to the the fragmentation of Christians into camps, sects and so on) , biblical thinking or something else ?

 

[Israel]

On changed minds and thinking--- the how to think soberly. Romans 12-3


"3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith."

It seems to me that Paul is indicating here how the believer is to think soberly. He is saying, don't forget when your thinking that your thinking needs to be "through" the very grace given to believers and also not to forget that God has dealt to every man ( in this case every believer) the measure of faith.

Why would it be important to the principle of thinking to keep in mind that to every man, or to every believer, God has dealt the measure of faith? Paul seem to say that some might think themselves highly than they ought to think, if they forget that God has dealt to every man the measure of faith--why?

There is today in the sciences, in their fact declarations and in declarations as to truth the discipline of peer review to provide for sensible thinking. Or in Journalism there is corroboration on reported facts.

I suggest that Paul seems to state that a believer's thinking cannot be left to opinions or editorials, but to facts that can be assesses by peers and corroborated especially because all believers have been dealt the measure of faith and all believers can process assessments through grace.


So why do believers today continue with understandings of the gospel that are almost the opposite one the other? Why are doctrines so different? Why are periodic revivals needed? Why does the study of scripture give open to new and dynamic doctrine concerning the gospel's contents, and gives birth to new christian communities, sects and denominations, not to mention dropouts from believer communities-- but who continue in the way as if this way of being is itself doctrinal?

I have some ideas. Spiritual belief gives over to our ways of social life, culture and economic life. When economic and social life is ailing to the point of affecting negatively dynamic social life ( upsetting it) to the point that the very needs of daily living are compromised then their might be thinking by believers in this way: there is something wrong with spiritual belief.

It might be easy therefore to understand or make an assessment that some will align thinking this way: Social injustice = equals errors in spiritual belief and at the expense of Paul's criteria of keeping in mind grace and that all believers have a measure of faith regards thinking and how to proceed as Christians.

I'm thinking of the example of the Peasant Wars in Europe right now for some reason and the peasant's social outlook with the implication on spiritual outlook. The Reformation was it brought about through this outlook? The institutional Church at this time had tremendous economic and social power. Was the thinking then on the right way to come to a positive outcome, ( which led to the the fragmentation of Christians into camps, sects and so on) , biblical thinking or something else ?

I don't know.

I am trying to apprehend your understanding. Is it that survey of that present social and economic estate (I know nothing of the Peasant Wars, truly, but can understand how the context of "war" has great influences) may have led to an adjustment that may not have been truly spiritual...but only reactionary to that context?

Is that in any way approaching what you have presented to consider?

 

[gordon 2]

The Peasant Wars.


"Peasants' War, (1524–25) peasant uprising in Germany. Inspired by changes brought by the Reformation, peasants in western and southern Germany invoked divine law to demand agrarian rights and freedom from oppression by nobles and landlords. As the uprising spread, some peasant groups organized armies."

My point is perhaps simply this: Was the reformation ideals and the many sects that followed due to spiritual reasons and thinking or economic reasoning and thinking?

And today in the media did you see the many views regards life and the economy? Is it through grace that believers distill today's challenges? Do they proceed not knowing what they declare or do when challenges occur that their response will be assessed by believers due faith and through grace?

So what really comes first in our thinking as believers when we play around with doctrines? Are our assessments in consideration of what Paul states In Romans 12:3 or are they based on somethings else like biology's " survival of the fittest" or economic theory on capital or resources in the guise of divine law on freedom for example?

If my understanding of Paul on how to think and how to temper our thinking is correct... many of our doctrines and ideas at odds with each other in Christianity would not need be. And it is because we ignore his counsel that so many sects in Christianity exist, and where the motivation to go it alone is really a grab for physical resources as opposed to spiritual truths.


Why am I a Mormon and fond of their doctrines, for example? Is it because my ancestors saw in the sect a way to get land in Ohio or Utah? Or because of what Paul says in Roman 12:3? Is religious freedom just another name for economic freedom and a disregard of Romans 12:3?

 

[Israel]

Now if I understand you, you're asking one of those (to me) fundamental questions.

At what point does faith and the leading of the Spirit buckle to self interest?

Does true faith ever "do it"? If so must it? Or is it not the faith that need buckle or ever can, or does...but the man must recognize his own "non-immunity" to it? How easily a man can buckle.

Drunk men (not sober) often carry on as though their inebriation is not only concealable...but in vast overestimation of their ability. So there are lessons (as I see it) built into the caution to think soberly, for there are consequences unavoidable to not.

This alone is where all (if I have enjoyed any) learning has taken place...the penalty for drunk driving, speaking, acting. I may only be as one just less drunk enough to recognize being in the drunk tank, but this is great progress for one who last night tried to kiss the jailer thinking him my wife before saying "goodnight dear."

Where am I Lord? is a not infrequent question I find myself asking.

But I think your question, if I even yet understand, remains fundamental.

How do I know whether it is just my last good meal speaking? How do I know it is not in mere anticipation and excitement of some material thing? How do I know if my next words come only from a comfortable chair in a warm (or cooled) house...and might not be very different if in a cold cell and having already received 30 lashes...the jailer now waits to hear what my next response will be? Daring me to "Just go ahead...say that again!"

If betrayal "must be", can I suffer to ask of the Lord "is it I, Lord?"

Regardless of what I may think I can (or am able, or am "allowed" to) present of my preferences...for after all, haven't my own preferences...always been my own undoing? (Sure I'd prefer to not think of myself as a cowardly traitor...but might just that preference...be sufficient for me to be kept from seeing how not to be one?)

I know I am of less than any help in these things. Cause a drunk man who wouldn't know how drunk he could be...could just take you on a devastating ride, himself. But I do recognize the questions...as worthy. (If I understand) They may even be more worthy if I yet...do not understand.

Martin Scorsese "Silence". 2016.

 

[Israel]

I might add.
The consideration of your questions leaves me reminded of the need to beware of any bent toward asceticism for its own sake. That may be of my own particular caution in regards to my own perspective of myself as being exceedingly self indulgent.

Not unlike the pendulum swinging to extremes in some form of self correction, there can be an over compensating that lends itself to will worship. But ends up being no more than a vain spiritual exercise in whack a mole. And what may be "popping up" may be far more dangerous than what is so apparently clear.

And that may be the greater danger to our faith in the end. I am forced to consider it a better estate to be an obesely greedy pig of a soul than to perhaps be a self convinced pious ascetic, taking the greater pride...not in what one has, but in what one believes he has forgone. This may be the greater snare...making of our Lord and in exchange of Him a burden to be borne of our sacrifice, rather than a gift celebrated.

And in that may also be the greater danger to the church at large from any particular soul. The infusion of what appears a spirituality always in the prevailing knowledge of its own loss, the sour grapes exuding that are far more cleverly hidden (except to the Lord) than the grossly acquisitive soul seeking to make merchandise of the gospel. Rightly we are cautioned against such.

The "giving our body to be burned" merely (if without love) the bestowing of all our possessions (if without love) meaning nothing. Men can be zealous for things and their acquisition...but the more dangerous may be those zealous for a deranged concept of God. Many a man has gone the way of "self sacrifice" for principle and principles, the family Goebbels easily coming to mind. Even when such principles are manifestly corrupt.


Therefore I'd hoped to make clear as I cannot deny it to myself, the dangers of left ditch/right ditch may not always and only come down a betrayal or loss of course heading due to only the seemingly obvious economic factors. Are they ever present? Surely. But no less are those factors that influence as might be considered the "higher faculties" and engagements of the soul. In this I am convinced there is no comfort to be found in "it's better to err on the side of", in preference of one over another.

The pleasure of having ones life simplified (if it be of the Spirit's tutelage) should never be represented as anything but gift. The being loosed of previously assumed weights and pressures of either possessions or performance is a great gift. But again, if love not be the end, it is all vanity.
And of such love's true measure and judgment I am persuaded is ultimately only left here:

But if any man love God, the same is known of him.

To allow that the Lord's appearing to us is in His hands alone, but nevertheless being persuaded to be ever watchful for Him might have Him received one day as a huge and greasy fingered venture capitalist, and the next as a scrawny toothless beggar. Or, for His purposes He may choose to display us as such.

Our dispositions of "how we want to see the Lord" must make way for how the Lord is lest we be persuaded away from what is a supreme gift of most delightful occupation...to seek Him, and find Him. We are told only singleness of heart accomplishes this.

And this is perhaps why we are graciously given "time" to practice. To discover the Lord's intent of our delight even exceeds our own will and desire to it, and there to find ourselves being changed.

To the hungry soul even every bitter thing becomes sweet.

 

[gordon 2]

I think singleness of heart is very difficult even for the believer, the tug of the world is weighty and that Romans 12:3 is the check and balance for the believer and resource to think on these matters by believers. It is the base frame of mind needed to keep perspective from a Christian vantage. It keeps thought focused on truth because grace and that every christian has been dealt by God the measure of faith is the truth in Christianity. These two are the checks and balances of how we proceed in outlooks and actions. It keeps logic within the frame work of God's will, guards for truth and provides for sureness in declaration, study, and actions. Within this discipline our neighbor becomes ourselves and from ourselves we cannot hide or deceive. In this way it would be difficult to declare doctrine as to shatter even the self.

The road is narrow and the ditches are to each side, not to mention the center line and two, three, four way traffic, but Romans 12-3 might just be our peace of mind.

 

[Israel]

I think singleness of heart is very difficult even for the believer, the tug of the world is weighty and that Romans 12:3 is the check and balance for the believer and resource to think on these matters by believers. It is the base frame of mind needed to keep perspective from a Christian vantage. It keeps thought focused on truth because grace and that every christian has been dealt by God the measure of faith is the truth in Christianity. These two are the checks and balances of how we proceed in outlooks and actions. It keeps logic within the frame work of God's will, guards for truth and provides for sureness in declaration, study, and actions. Within this discipline our neighbor becomes ourselves and from ourselves we cannot hide or deceive. In this way it would be difficult to declare doctrine as to shatter even the self.

The road is narrow and the ditches are to each side, not to mention the center line and two, three, four way traffic, but Romans 12-3 might just be our peace of mind.

I think singleness of heart is very difficult even for the believer, the tug of the world is weighty and that Romans 12:3 is the check and balance for the believer and resource to think on these matters by believers.

I am inclined to believe it impossible except it be revealed as promise and received as gift.

Not that I have attained by any means, but that a delightful stripping away becomes plainer and plainer to an almost shocking point of "why don't I care about such and such anymore...and...should I? How very careless it seems..."...but there is nothing found in it but a reckless joy when seriously considered.

Things promised delivered without my care or forethought at all, but God forbid I glory in anything but His faithfulness.

So much promised us, such meticulous care secured in a testament of blood, that were it not for that blood I have no choice but to be ashamed. Even those moments in consideration when, along the way the Spirit would rebuff and say "but that is not your care" and I would seemingly struggle in letting go, or be very unconvinced I had...sort of "making a sacrifice" when all the Spirit was doing was prying open a clenched hand so used to grasping.

Thanks be to God for mercy and grace...and a way of heart toward the stiff-necked...