Anti-intellectualism and hostility to Theology

[Pavel Mosko]

Since the early 90s I've noticed that there can a good deal of anti-Intellectualism in the "Spirit Filled" end of the Christian world. Here's a few examples:

1) Back in 1990-1992 when I was brand new to the movement going to my friemds "Word of Faith" church I noticed that Ken Hagin and his followers liked to crack jokes about people who had degrees (PhD. means "Piled High and Deep") and so on. Besides this, it generally seemed these people also had bad attitude about people who have higher education especially in Christian fields).

2) People who have an intellectual bent sometimes are told to be "not in their head", but in the "spirit".

3) In Sermons on "the Spirit", "being spirtual", "being lead by the Spirit", the Spirit is often contrasted "with the intellect" in a way that makes them seem pretty much completely at odds with each other. (This is true, sometimes, but often they are complimentary if you look at the Bible and the Lexicon words of Hebrew and Greek on such issues as inspiration and spiritual discernment).

4) Like point 2 & 3, the same is true for "Being Soulish" (Which besides being emotional can also be slam at being "to in your head" (because the intellect is part of the Soul).

5) At various times I have been told by various charismatic how unspiritual etc. Theology is. "Jesus did not do theology" I've been told and "There is no theology in the Bible" (I can actually disprove this point with a few verses).

Anyway the whole point of this thread is I'm involved Theology, I can point to areas of the Bible where point 5 is contradicted.

MATTHEW 23:34 (NIV)
Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.

Mark 12:30 New International Version (NIV)
30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’


But points 1-4 have really stuck in my craw for 28 years and counting, So I figured I would do a thread about it and here it is....

 

[com7fy8]

2) People who have an intellectual bent sometimes are told to be "not in their head", but in the "spirit".

Knowledge can puff up, right? And I need how God's word means for me to be and live, in my heart.

And in my case knowing the word can have me only self-righteously criticizing people who do not match what what I suppose I know.

So, I need how Jesus makes us compassionate . . . how the word means for us to relate tenderly and caring as family and ready to adopt ones who have not trusted in Jesus.

And a lot of things in the Bible which we can know are meant to go with how God does in us what He means by His word. So, we don't really know certain things, until God in us does what it really means!!!

That's my intellectual take on it

 

[Sabertooth]

I am a Charismatic who is a member of Mensa & Intertel. I like my intelligence but do not expect it to bring about Spiritual phenomena.

I speak/pray in Tongues, have had Words of Wisdom and Discerning of spirits and they all function independently from my intellect. Mind and spirit serve different purposes.

 

[dzheremi]

Hello Pavel. You are Oriental Orthodox, no? Read up on some of what we proclaim in our liturgies and other places. I've made a thread on the treatment of the intellect in Orthodoxy vis-a-vis Catholicism/Western Christianity which you may want to read, but even without reading that, you can again look at the prayers of the churches, which call Christ "the Teacher" (in the Coptic Psali Watos for the Transfiguration), and say that God Himself most definitely "does theology" (see, e.g., the Coptic Agpeya, under "The Faith of the Church", Prime hour).

This is not to challenge whatever is believed in this particular forum (I've actually never visited here before; hello, everyone ), but to say that the answers to your questions can be found in the prayers and wisdom of the Church itself, in a myriad of different places and ways.

 

[Francis Drake]

Since the early 90s I've noticed that there can a good deal of anti-Intellectualism in the "Spirit Filled" end of the Christian world. ………..

The church has been under the control of intellectuals for nearly 2000 years. During that time, these intellectuals waged war on anything that smacked of the Holy Spirit by burning them at the stake or using any other convenient way of murdering them.
The prime intention of most church leaders throughout that time was always to maintain their position, power, and control over God's children.

2) People who have an intellectual bent sometimes are told to be "not in their head", but in the "spirit".

That's because the intellect and the spirit are in complete opposition to each other.

3) In Sermons on "the Spirit", "being spirtual", "being lead by the Spirit", the Spirit is often contrasted "with the intellect" in a way that makes them seem pretty much completely at odds with each other. (This is true, sometimes, but often they are complimentary if you look at the Bible and the Lexicon words of Hebrew and Greek on such issues as inspiration and spiritual discernment).

They are contrasted because they are generally at odds with each other.

MATTHEW 23:34 (NIV)
Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.

Good verse, but does you no favours. The people Jesus sent, whether prophets or teachers, they never resourced what they were bringing from their heads or intellect.

Everything goes right back to the Garden of Eden. There were two trees there, The Tree of Life, and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.

These two trees ultimately represent spiritual life versus human intellect. Adam chose to rule the planet by his human intellect rather than submitting his reign to the Spirit of God. As he was warned, his foolish choice brought death.

This conflict is ongoing in the church today, with intellectual Christians constantly trying to crush the spiritual life out of the church with their theological control.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with theology, obviously the bible is full of it. But that theology must be submitted to the Spirit and never be allowed to develop a life of its own as has been the case since Jesus rebuked the Pharisees.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

I am a Charismatic who is a member of Mensa & Intertel. I like my intelligence but do not expect it to bring about Spiritual phenomena.

I speak/pray in Tongues, have had Words of Wisdom and Discerning of spirits and they all function independently from my intellect. Mind and spirit serve different purposes.

Hi Saber! I get what your saying, but I think I may disagree on some fine points. I may be posting more on root words for Spiritual Discernment and stuff like that. Maybe tomorrow or the coming days, but thanks for posting.

PS - come to think of it, that will be a later thread.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

1 Corinthians 12:12-27 New International Reader's Version (NIRV)

One Body but Many Parts
12 There is one body, but it has many parts. But all its many parts make up one body. It is the same with Christ. 13 We were all baptized by one Holy Spirit. And so we are formed into one body. It didn’t matter whether we were Jews or Gentiles, slaves or free people. We were all given the same Spirit to drink. 14 So the body is not made up of just one part. It has many parts.

15 Suppose the foot says, “I am not a hand. So I don’t belong to the body.” By saying this, it cannot stop being part of the body. 16 And suppose the ear says, “I am not an eye. So I don’t belong to the body.” By saying this, it cannot stop being part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, how could it hear? If the whole body were an ear, how could it smell? 18 God has placed each part in the body just as he wanted it to be. 19 If all the parts were the same, how could there be a body? 20 As it is, there are many parts. But there is only one body.

21 The eye can’t say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” The head can’t say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” 22 In fact, it is just the opposite. The parts of the body that seem to be weaker are the ones we can’t do without. 23 The parts that we think are less important we treat with special honor. The private parts aren’t shown. But they are treated with special care. 24 The parts that can be shown don’t need special care. But God has put together all the parts of the body. And he has given more honor to the parts that didn’t have any. 25 In that way, the parts of the body will not take sides. All of them will take care of one another. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it. If one part is honored, every part shares in its joy. 27 You are the body of Christ. Each one of you is a part of it.


In terms of my OP, on the issue of theology and the hostility towards it, I really believe the people who sneer at theology and the people who do it really are doing what this chapter is speaking out against!

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Acts 9:

15 But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is my chosen to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and to the people of Israel. 16 I will show him how much he must suffer for my name.”


Kind of interesting that the person who did the most for Christianity in the NT (other than Jesus) is also the most educated.

 

[Sabertooth]

Kind of interesting that the person who did the most for Christianity in the NT (other than Jesus) is also the most educated.

If I may split hairs, educated and intelligent [the topic of the OP] aren't necessarily the same thing. And there is a third, related element, wisdom.

I don't know where I am going with this, but the emphasis of education seems to be a departure from the OP.

If we were to compare knowledge to money,

1. An academic would be like a man who has amassed a sizable fortune,
2. An intellectual would be like someone who is skilled at manipulating such resources, be they his or someone else's, and
3. A wise man would have a vision for advancing said resources to Godly objectives.

They are three different qualities that may or may not exist in a single individual, but they are not synonymous.

Even Paul disowned his education at times [1 Corinthians 2:1-3].

 

[topher694]

Long response warning!

I am an ordained minister and lead pastor of a church, however I did not go to school or seminary for a theology degree or anything like that. I was trained by being under strong leadership and doing whatever I could to help, learn & gain experience.

My own experience with #1: I have had several ministers who do have a degree look down on me, talk behind my back, and just outright dismiss anything I say or do because I don’t have a piece of paper like them. I have nothing against a degree, but a degree is not the same thing as a calling. Paul had a ton of schooling through being a Pharisee, Peter was a simple uneducated fisherman. Both were called to ministry – and successful at it (in fact Paul under Peter’s authority). A bad attitude about people without a degree is wrong, and a bad attitude about people with a degree is wrong. But perhaps the hostility you noticed was a response to hostility those people experienced… similar my own experiences (just an thought, that doesn’t make it right).

Part of the reason the education thing bugs me is that I am also a senior level software engineer. That is very near the top level of that profession. I also accomplished that without getting a degree – and because of my experience and results, no one cares. When it comes to education, I just do better self-teaching, others do not. We do what works for us.

I believe all that makes me uniquely qualified to speak about #2 & 3. It doesn’t get more intellectual/logical than computer programming, yet I teach people how to flow in the spirit. It is true that people can get in their heads, I see it all the time. I used to be in my head. But, what I try to encourage people who struggle with this (as I once did) is that faith/spirituality/whatever you want to call it, can and DOES make intellectual sense. The trick is, the starting point needs to be the spiritual not the intellectual. Faith and intellect do not have to be adversarial, both are actually very good things. The problem (like with so many things in this world) is not with one or the other, but when the priority is out of order. To put it another way, pursue God and then understanding. Don’t try to pursue understanding then God.

#4 is very similar to 2 & 3. Emotions just like intellect are not bad. When we let them guide us instead of God our priorities are out of whack and that can lead to problems. Many times the term “soulish” is used to describe what I just said: that priorities are out of order. But again that doesn’t make soulish things bad.

#5, yeah that’s just silly. I mean some theology out there IS unscriptural, but the concept of theology itself is scriptural. Jesus certainly established theological truths. In my experience people that quickly dismiss doctrine (I’m not talking about flaky stuff here) usually are just using that as an excuse to dismiss order and authority so they can do what they want without consequences.

Phew!

 

[Pavel Mosko]

If I may split hairs, educated and intelligent [the topic of the OP] but the emphasis of education seems to be a departure from the OP.

The education bit was because of point 5 and also what I read of Francis Drakes post.

If we were to compare knowledge to money,

1. An academic would be like a man who has amassed a sizable fortune,
2. An intellectual would be like someone who is skilled at manipulating such resources, be they his or someone else's, and
3. A wise man would have a vision for advancing said resources to Godly objectives.

They are three different qualities that may or may not exist in a single individual, but they are not synonymous.

It's interesting. What I'm sort of getting at is what is talked about is something like plenary inspiration.

Verbal plenary inspiration: This view gives a greater role to the human writers of the Bible while maintaining a belief that God preserved the integrity of the words of the Bible. The effect of inspiration was to move the authors so as to produce the words God wanted.

The works of the Bible are inspired but they contain much of the personality of the writers and such. (You get the impression by some people that they think the NT authors used something like Autonomic writing to write the Bible etc.)


Besides that there is the issue of Spiritual Discernment. I'm going to save that for another thread. But there is a basic paradigm that I have Nick named, "Use the Force Luke!" after Star Wars. After dealing with Charismatics, the first thing I did when I started a Bible School (Which was Christian International, Topher694 incidentally), was try to put my Lexicon and Strongs to good use. But anyway, a number of passages dealing with discernment, wisdom and the like have an analytical component to them. Which I found interesting, because it seemed I was slammed for being analytical which is part of my personality (Myers Briggs INTJ, and an investigative one on the Eanegram)

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Part of the reason the education thing bugs me is that I am also a senior level software engineer. That is very near the top level of that profession. I also accomplished that without getting a degree – and because of my experience and results, no one cares. When it comes to education, I just do better self-teaching, others do not. We do what works for us.

That's cool I lived 20 years in Silicon valley prior to moving to NC!


Overall I didn't have a problem with what you said and it wasn't too long a scroller.

I do have an agenda (which sounds ominous I realize) to promote the notion among Spirit Filled people that the mind is not necessarily "the enemy" and when it is illuminated by the Holy Spirit really good things happen.

Besides that, sometime I want to talk about the automatic equation of ecstasy and emotional catharsis with the Spiritual! I am definitely going to have a thread on that sometime here at some point!


PS - One point 1) my best friend blames the Asuza St, guy, not brother Seymore, there was another whose name I don't remember who was "told to get an education", and he said I don't need it, I got the Spirit! And his followers kept up that tradition.

I've talked to an ex-Assembly of God guy who became a philosophy instructor. While I realized having a working class background was part of why folks like Hagin said the things they did, he mentioned how this was a bigger factor demographically speaking than I suspected or realized.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

My own experience with #1: I have had several ministers who do have a degree look down on me, talk behind my back, and just outright dismiss anything I say or do because I don’t have a piece of paper like them. I have nothing against a degree, but a degree is not the same thing as a calling. Paul had a ton of schooling through being a Pharisee, Peter was a simple uneducated fisherman. Both were called to ministry – and successful at it (in fact Paul under Peter’s authority). A bad attitude about people without a degree is wrong, and a bad attitude about people with a degree is wrong. But perhaps the hostility you noticed was a response to hostility those people experienced… similar my own experiences (just an thought, that doesn’t make it right).

What you brought does remind of something I wanted to mention. There are times when Charismatic Prophets teach from the Bible and make some whopping mistakes (which would have not happened if they researched, took some classes etc.) Which is bad because I think many people are tempted to believe everything they say (unless it is too controversial) and I'm not sure how much of what they prophesy are just gut hunches rather than true revelations. (I have received some accurate personal prophecies, so I'm not denying that exists etc.)

But here are 2 examples:


11Truly I tell you, among those born of womenthere has risen no one greater than Johnthe Baptist. Yet even the least in thekingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Sadu Sundar Selvaraj in preaching seems to imply having a revelation on that passage on why that is. He believes because John doubted while he was in prison is why he isn't as great, but really pretty much the common almost universal interpretation of that passage is because we in the New Testament have a better covenant than the OT one and John was the last minister of the Old Covenant.


Rick Joyner has had some biggies too.

3 Now Moses was a very humbleman, more so than any man on the face of the earth

He believes that Moses was prophesying about himself, but in Hebrew class we discussed scribal remarks. At one time, the scribes had a habit of writing clarifying remarks in the text to act like footnotes (to help out the younger people after the customs and culture changed. The sandal swapping remark in Ruth is another example).

 

[Pavel Mosko]

f I may split hairs, educated and intelligent [the topic of the OP] aren't necessarily the same thing. And there is a third, related element, wisdom.

I had an extra thought before I turn in. In a previous post. I mentioned about Charismatic prophets that made big preaching blunders due to not doing their homework or not having the education. This remind me of a book "Faith Foolishness and Presumption" by Fred Price. As a young charismatic I actually got some good out of that book. It mentioned how Faith should not be used for silly things, especially getting out of work and common sense type things. He actually uses examples of people attempting to loose weight by "casting calories out of food" rather than dieting, and married couples using "Faith" for birth control (with less than stellar results). Anyway, I think the same thing can be said for preaching and teaching, if a person think's their prophetic anointing is going to do all the work for them then they will be sadly mistaken!

 

[topher694]

What you brought does remind of something I wanted to mention. There are times when Charismatic Prophets teach from the Bible and make some whopping mistakes (which would have not happened if they researched, took some classes etc.) Which is bad because I think many people are tempted to believe everything they say (unless it is too controversial) and I'm not sure how much of what they prophesy are just gut hunches rather than true revelations. (I have received some accurate personal prophecies, so I'm not denying that exists etc.)

But here are 2 examples:


11Truly I tell you, among those born of womenthere has risen no one greater than Johnthe Baptist. Yet even the least in thekingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Sadu Sundar Selvaraj in preaching seems to imply having a revelation on that passage on why that is. He believes because John doubted while he was in prison is why he isn't as great, but really pretty much the common almost universal interpretation of that passage is because we in the New Testament have a better covenant than the OT one and John was the last minister of the Old Covenant.


Rick Joyner has had some biggies too.

3 Now Moses was a very humbleman, more so than any man on the face of the earth

He believes that Moses was prophesying about himself, but in Hebrew class we discussed scribal remarks. At one time, the scribes had a habit of writing clarifying remarks in the text to act like footnotes (to help out the younger people after the customs and culture changed. The sandal swapping remark in Ruth is another example).

Two thoughts here. 1. we are all subject to making mistakes, even prophets. Mistakes don't make you a false prophet (I know you didn't say that, but I just wanted to make that distinction). Plenty of prophets in the Bible made mistakes. 2. sometimes a prophet will prophesy out of a scripture. Meaning that he isn't saying that his prophecy is the true interpretation of the scripture, it is just the inspiration for the prophecy. Like a car, or the weather could be the inspiration (that's happened to me). The problem when that happens is if the prophet does not clarity that fact.

For example, you could teach on Paul being locked in prison (Acts 16), then speculate on what might have been going through his head. Like being angry and upset, but also afraid. They further speculate about how as they prayed and sang the spirit of God rose up in them and cast out the anger and fear, then the earthquake happened and the doors opened. Perhaps that is the inspiration to prophesy to people something like: "You have been in a place of anger and fear, but the Lord says I'm shaking your situation to the foundation. I'm opening doors before you, cast off your anger, cast off your fear, I'm loosing your chains, the hour of freedom and salvation is here" (Just an example, not an actual prophetic word, I've read the rules ) That could be a true inspired prophetic word, but the stuff about Paul & Silas is still just speculation. That kind of stuff happens.

That being said your first example, imo, he is just wrong and it's kinda silly. Even if John had doubted, Jesus didn't define others by their mistakes or shortcomings, why would he do so with John? If I'm understanding the second example correctly it also seems like a stretch.

 

[Pavel Mosko]

Two thoughts here. 1. we are all subject to making mistakes, even prophets. Mistakes don't make you a false prophet (I know you didn't say that, but I just wanted to make that distinction). Plenty of prophets in the Bible made mistakes. 2. sometimes a prophet will prophesy out of a scripture. Meaning that he isn't saying that his prophecy is the true interpretation of the scripture, it is just the inspiration for the prophecy. Like a car, or the weather could be the inspiration (that's happened to me). The problem when that happens is if the prophet does not clarity that fact.

I pretty much agree on what you said, but I will make this dissent when it comes to things like Prophesy in the Prophetic Movement, NAR etc. And to start out I've read and at one time owned the Bill Hamon books (Prophets and the Prophetic movement, 1, 2 and I thought there was maybe a 3rd one besides the Eternal Church). So I know the general approach about the 10 Ms of ministry etc. But I think the outlook on it is flawed (If you are serious about Biblical precedent that is).


There is a rule of thumb often cited by folks like Joyner that due to problems concerning experience and maturity there often is only a 70% accuracy rate on prophecy (In those situations when they can actually be tested, because many of times they are very general with nothing specific that can be checked.). That kind of reasoning is very problematic if you consider a number of passages: 1) Saint Paul in an epistle mentions we have a better covenant in every way than the OT one, 2) in the OT however, Samuel's "Word were said to have never fallen to the ground". 3) Besides the ones in the Pentateuch that mandate 100% accuracy for a word. 4 People often cite Jonah and Nineveh but even there are some extenuating circumstances. The word for destroy also means overturn in Hebrew so Nineveh repenting could be said of fulfilling that secondary meaning.


So far to me the only thing we have better as far as the new covenant goes on the narrow subject of prophecy is there is no threat for stoning! But I do think this is an issue. Many people quote the verse of

2 Timothy 3:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:


And apply it to the NT (which is good), but often are very dismissive of those OT verses that mandate prophetic accuracy and so on. The real irony is when that verse was written it was speaking about the OT, because the NT was currently being written and would take 3 centuries later to be canonized and called scripture by the early christians (the books were always called by their author and not "scripture" even though they were regarded as being inspired etc.).


In closing, I will say I've bumped into a few prophets that also agree with this view point. One of them on Facebook I was part of his "Prophetic Maturity group" for a number of months. (I was looking for a group that might help me grow in the gifts etc.). His point of view is he is very conservative on prophesy (As in he only gives them when 100% and is willing to give out less on those other kinds of holy hunches where you feel something but things aren't completely clear).

And he believes (like I do) that when you get misses etc. its often because there are other things at work, especially when it comes to wanting success and fame etc. Not necessarily that the person is always bad, but if people are invited as guest speakers etc. there is a lot of pressure and temptation to perform for the church they are invited to etc. to justify the expenses and the invite.

Take Care.

 

[Sabertooth]

Mind and spirit serve different purposes.

That's because the intellect and the spirit are in complete opposition to each other.

I am not so sure that they must be.

Jesus said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind." Matthew 22:37 NKJV

"And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God." Romans 12:2 NKJV

"For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ,..." 2 Corinthians 10:4-5 NKJV

"For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind." 2 Timothy 1:7 NKJV

 

[Francis Drake]

I am a Charismatic who is a member of Mensa & Intertel. I like my intelligence but do not expect it to bring about Spiritual phenomena.

I speak/pray in Tongues, have had Words of Wisdom and Discerning of spirits and they all function independently from my intellect. Mind and spirit serve different purposes.

Excellently stated.
"Mind and spirit serve two different purposes". -As perfectly illustrated by the two trees in the Garden of Eden.

The Tree of Life, which of course relates to spiritual life via our union with God.
or
The Tree of Knowledge of Good or Evil, which of course relates to independent human intellect.

Satan's offer was that if Adam chose the Tree of Knowledge, he could also be like God, ie. Adam could become the arbiter of right and wrong, good or evil by using his intellectual.

Of course in doing that, Adam would reject his union with God, he would become spiritually dead.

The folly of Christians is in thinking that Adam's decision was a quaint story that doesn't really concern us today. In reality, every time we place our intellect above our spirit, we repeat Adam's mistake.

No matter how perfect man's decisions regarding Good or Evil might be, if taken without God they will still bring spiritual death.

It is our Human Spirit alone that relates to God, not our intellect.
It is our Human Spirit that houses our conscience. Our conscience is God's radar, being the first indicator of God's thoughts.
As scripture states, that conscience can be damaged, or seared with a hot iron. That happens when human intellect is allowed to trample our conscience underfoot.

 

[Francis Drake]

What you brought does remind of something I wanted to mention. There are times when Charismatic Prophets teach from the Bible and make some whopping mistakes (which would have not happened if they researched, took some classes etc.)

Of course what you say is true.
But equally, it has been theologians without the Spirit who have misled the church for over 1800 years, creating thousands of sects and denominations often at war with each other.

​

Which is bad because I think many people are tempted to believe everything they say (unless it is too controversial) and I'm not sure how much of what they prophesy are just gut hunches rather than true revelations. (I have received some accurate personal prophecies, so I'm not denying that exists etc.)

The answer to bad prophetic practice is not to place it under theological control, but to make prophecy and spiritual discernment a day to day activity of all Christians.

But here are 2 examples:
???????????

I'm not going to address specific errors, but simply point out again the phenomenal volume of error throughout the church created by theologians of every conceivable tradition.
Theologians are no benchmark for anything in the church. They are just as prone to error as "spiritual" leaders.

Unless scripture is spiritually discerned and taught, theology will just bring death.
The Scribes, Pharisees, and Lawyers of Jesus's time proved that.

 

[Francis Drake]

I am not so sure that they must be.

I guess it depends which is in the ascendency!

Jesus said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind." Matthew 22:37 NKJV

Loving God with your mind only happens when you make it subservient to your spirit.

"And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God." Romans 12:2 NKJV

Again, your mind is only renewed when it serves your spirit.

"For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ,..." 2 Corinthians 10:4-5 NKJV

Even better. This illustrates my point perfectly. Bringing every thought into captivity means to make it subservient to your spirit. (Which is your only communion with God)

"For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind." 2 Timothy 1:7 NKJV

Absolutely. Soundness of mind only comes when it is tamed to listen to your spirit.