Are Charismatics thinkers?

[Theophilus7]

What's your opinion? Do you think your average Charismatic is more "low brow" as a rule - not the sort of person to have read, say, C.S. Lewis book on Miracles - or perhaps just a more "open minded" individual, more willing to play with new ideas and tolerate a greater diversity of opinion? Is an "egg head" a good thing, or do you think it gets in the way of the Spirit? Are Pentecostals invariably anti-intellectual, and if so, are they right to be?

This is the first topic thread I have initiated on ChristianForums, so I thought it would be interesting to leave the way fairly open and see what happens. I have my own opinions , but wouldn't mind seeing what other people have to say.

-- Post Update --

I am updating my post in the hope of correcting a particular trend in the replies to date. First, let me say that I consider myself a Charismatic. Second, I have not offered anyone my views on the subject chosen, as some have supposed - I have merely put some questions to the forum. Granted, you may deduce from the questions that the questioner himself has a low view of Charismatic acumen, but that is not the only possible explanation for the questions, and it is probably best not to leap too quickly to conclusions and get put out with him . In my case, I don't know the answers to some of those questions (though I do have opinions about the Christian attitude towards the mind), but have seen them raised either directly or implicitly in some of the literature I have read, and was interested in seeing how Charismatics thought of themselves and how they believe themselves to be thought of in general. Let's see some really thoughtful responses to some of those questions, then.

A qualification
Finally, let me offer a qualification of the questions above (one which I had in mind originally, actually, though unstated) which may narrow the discussion into more fruitful channels: Are Charismatics in general any of the above with regards to their Christianity. (It goes without saying that there will be people within the Charismatic Renewal who are I.T. specialists, Teachers, Doctors etc.)

Cheers,

Theophilus7

 

[Metanoia02]

What's your opinion? Do you think your average Charismatic is more "low brow" as a rule - not the sort of person to have read, say, C.S. Lewis book on Miracles - or perhaps just a more "open minded" individual, more willing to play with new ideas and tolerate a greater diversity of opinion? Is an "egg head" a good thing, or do you think it gets in the way of the Spirit? Are Pentecostals invariably anti-intellectual, and if so, are they right to be?

I think you present a common stereotype of Charismatics. I would hate to generalize to that extent. I do not know that many Charismatics so I don't have an opinion myself. Certainly by nature of thie highly emotional approach towards worship, they my forfeit intellectualism for emotionalism.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

What's your opinion? Do you think your average Charismatic is more "low brow" as a rule - not the sort of person to have read, say, C.S. Lewis book on Miracles - or perhaps just a more "open minded" individual, more willing to play with new ideas and tolerate a greater diversity of opinion? Is an "egg head" a good thing, or do you think it gets in the way of the Spirit? Are Pentecostals invariably anti-intellectual, and if so, are they right to be?

This is the first topic thread I have initiated on ChristianForums, so I thought it would be interesting to leave the way fairly open and see what happens. I have my own opinions , but wouldn't mind seeing what other people have to say.

I see it the other way. A person would have to be pretty dumb to not receive the things of God which are freely given to us. Most of the people I have met who are charismatic are also WOF. They are very intelligent and have a deeper understanding of the Word and God than most who are not. I see most "theologian" types to be wishy washy. Not an insult mind you... just an observation. They do not commit to anything because the things of God are revealed in the scripture seem to be beyond the grasp of those who consider themselves "wise".

I hate to say it, but sometimes Christians on the "theological" side of CF seem to be incapable of grasping some of the principles that we present. They obviously are not dim... but the ability to see is not controlled by intellegence or education. It is controlled by faith. Look at our friends the atheists... they are certainly not stupid... yet the scripture says they are fools. How much of this sort of blindness affects Christians who have too much book learning and not enough Book learning?

Not blow my horn, but I do not consider myself or my family to be lowbrow.
My wife was an award winning journalist for 15 years before starting her own business.
We home schooled all our children, all of whom went on to college and were on dean's and president's lists.
My oldest son was programming computers when he was 12, and was teaching college classes in his freshman year.
I graduated summa cum laude with a degree in computer Technology/Programming, and am a Systems Analyst with SC state government college.

Before I began the systematic study of the Bible, my IQ was consistently tested at 142... the same as my father and all 3 of my brothers.
After 20 years of Bible study and teaching, my IQ was recently tested at 156 math, 146 verbal. IQ is not supposed to change... but there it is.

So I do not think people who believe God are dumb. It looks that way sometimes because in many instances people with position and power are to proud to lift their hands and praise God. I have found there is resistance to being considered "spiritual" among the academic types. Overall there is a lot of resistance in society in general against public displays of spirituality.
People who have no position and power have nothing to lose...

But this should not be mistaken for stupidity.

 

[kdet]

Most of the people in our church are highly educated. I can't even imagine someone posing this question....to what purpose?

 

[themuzicman]

I guess I'd have to know whether you meant "smart" or "rational in their thinking", or whether you mean "intellectual in their faith."

I find that those who are "intellectual in their faith" tend to shy away from charismata because it isn't something they can get their arms around and explain how and when to use it in any and every setting. God tends to break boxes that we put Him in, so the intellectual tends to deny these things so that things that happen in the church and in life can be neatly arranged.

That isn't to say that Charismatics aren't smart or intelligent, but rather they tend to deal with God both as a servant and with an open mind to what and how God wants to work, without limitation. To the charismatic, God isn't to be understood and formalized, but is to be worshipped and followed, even into the strangest of circumstances.

That doesn't make them any less theological, either.

Michael

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Well said people. . .I must admit I was a bit put off by the question. . .but I do like your answers.

I consider myself a "thinker". A bit blonde at times but still a thinker. Me and God go round and round sometimes until I finely get it. . . and when I do. . .it's gotten. If ya know what I mean.

I know Charasmatic/Penticostal/WOF people from both sides. Rich and poor. Highly educated to non-educated. Some thinkers and some who don't think.

If you think of it though, most of Jesus' disciples were uneducated. They were probably considered low-brow too. But look what Jesus did through them.

All they had to do was believe what He said . . .and who woulda thought that one would walk on water, another would be transported from one place to another and lead someone to the Lord and then baptize them.

One of the educated followers was bit by a poisonous snake while being held as a prisoner, but it did not even affect him. He was also boiled in oil but lived.

Oh, yes, and we can't forget the blind being made to see, the lame being made to walk, demons being cast out. . .etc., etc., etc.. I don't think any of this woulda happened if they'd stopped to think about it.

 

[Andrew]

There are surgeons, doctors, lawyers, accountants and engineers in my church. So certainly, they ae intellectual.

There's nothing wrong with that, AS LONG AS your brain and intellect is subservient to your spirit and the leading of the Spirit. ie you know that the things of God are discerned by the spirit not intellect.

The only problem with intellectual people, whether they are surgeons or theologians is that they tend to rely on the mind and try to 'figure' and 'reason' the things of God, which are to be discerned spiritually, not with their heads. Can't blame them though since they undergo so much training in the area of their mind.

that said, recently, there was a surgeon who had just been born again. yet when my pastor preached on the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and speaking "gibberish", he was able to put aside reasoning and just believed and received instantly.

 

[Heinrich]

This is a silly question.
In my "charismatic like" church (If I have to label it)
most people are educated and more than halve is from the university.
thus busy studying.
Most poeple come from Reformed and other non-charismatic churches,
so I think we are the more "open minded" people here.

But this is missing the point. I've seen many people lives change
over the last few months (including my own) for the better
and coming closer to walking in the fullness of christ.

"I have come that they may have life, and that they
may have it more ABUNDANTLY." - John 10:10

 

[Theophilus7]

I think you present a common stereotype of Charismatics. I would hate to generalize to that extent.

Actually, I wasn't presenting my picture of Charismatics, as such - just asking some questions about how other people perceive the overall picture to be. However, the fact that you apparently consider a low-brow to be "a common stereotype" of Charismatics is useful information, and more direct information than anything I disclosed in my first post (in its original form).

I do not know that many Charismatics so I don't have an opinion myself. Certainly by nature of thie [sic] highly emotional approach towards worship, they my [sic] forfeit intellectualism for emotionalism.

I have not seen a great deal of Charismatic worship. What traits do you observe which would prompt you to classify it as largely "emotionalism", and in what ways do you think it forfeits "intellectualism"?

Cheers,

Theophilus7

 

[Theophilus7]

There's nothing wrong with that, AS LONG AS your brain and intellect is subservient to your spirit and the leading of the Spirit. ie you know that the things of God are discerned by the spirit not intellect.

Here I think we arrive at the crux of the matter; the separation of mind and spirit. If you regard the pneuma to be the essential part of man, and something totally separate from the nous [mind, understanding], then that is going to affect your approach to theology, I think, and the question of discernment in general.

The only problem with intellectual people, whether they are surgeons or theologians is that they tend to rely on the mind and try to 'figure' and 'reason' the things of God, which are to be discerned spiritually, not with their heads.

Do you consider it acceptable then, to believe in two things that are mutually exclusive, or radically inconsistent? If the things of God are not to be discerned with the head, then I presume you don't expect the Bible to "add up" (?).

Cheers,

Theophilus 7

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Here I think we arrive at the crux of the matter; the separation of mind and spirit. If you regard the pneuma to be the essential part of man, and something totally separate from the nous [mind, understanding], then that is going to affect your approach to theology, I think, and the question of discernment in general.

On the contrary Theophilus. We are to know the scripture yet not operate according to what we, as a human, with thoughts that are different from God's, might rationalize.

Do you consider it acceptable then, to believe in two things that are mutually exclusive, or radically inconsistent? If the things of God are not to be discerned with the head, then I presume you don't expect the Bible to "add up" (?).

Cheers,

Theophilus 7

They are only mutually exclusive when we get into the flesh and operate outside of what God thinks and depend upon our own understanding. Scripture says that God is "the revealer of secrets". Secrets that one, relying on his own understanding will consider foolishness. Working with God, and allowing the Holy Spirit to bring understanding, the Bible actually adds up better.

Most of those I know who rely on their own understanding consider the Bible to be flawed. . . on the other hand, I see that it adds up perfectly.

 

[Theophilus7]

On the contrary Theophilus. We are to know the scripture yet not operate according to what we, as a human, with thoughts that are different from God's, might rationalize.

Certainly, I cannot think of anyone I have read who would claim the illumination of the Holy Spirit is unnecessary. I think we are in agreement on that point. However, I think Andrew's position may lead him to conclude that rigorous (and academic) study of the Bible is unspiritual, since the emphasis on discerning truth is placed entirely upon the spirit, and the spirit is perceived to be separate from the intellect, according to the particular model of man our friend subscribes to.

The only problem with intellectual people... is that they tend to rely on the mind and try to 'figure' and 'reason' the things of God, which are to be discerned spiritually, not with their heads.

I would suggest that there is a more balanced approach that combines the subjective and the intellectual components of our constitution in harmony. First, we recognise that the theological propositions of the Bible are "true and reasonable" (Acts 26:25) - there is no need to check your brain out at the door when you go to Church. Second, we note the commandment to love God (and thus the things of God) with all our "mind" (Mark 12:30). Third, we acknowledge our need for the Holy Spirit to help us countenance those truths honestly and objectively, since we are sinful and have a hard time facing up to some of the cutting truths of scripture, even as Christians. Would you have problems with this approach to "theology" (or Bible study)?

All for now

Theophilus7

 

[Theophilus7]

This is a silly question.

Perhaps you will find the updated version of my original post more helpful. Take a look.

Theophilus7

 

[deg]

Wonderful, evoking posts brother Theo:

And as a charismatic, I can say that "we" are often found barking. I mean, no, wait, that's not what I mean.

Less intelligent? No, that wouldn't be correct. Generally found avoiding the application of the wonderful gifts of logic and reason to the only consistantly truthful book on the planet? Perhaps. Less willing to work for an attainable goal, "faithfully resting" on the fact that all things should be at our disposal through the infinite resources of our Lord? Undoubtedly. We as charismatics desire wisdom without thought, knowledge without learning, obtainment without striving. It's really sad, and has cut the legs out from under the Divine purpose for that little thing we like to call "Time".

Keep tickling them, Theo...With the right words, even a cemetary can spring to life.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Certainly, I cannot think of anyone I have read who would claim the illumination of the Holy Spirit is unnecessary. I think we are in agreement on that point. However, I think Andrew's position may lead him to conclude that rigorous (and academic) study of the Bible is unspiritual, since the emphasis on discerning truth is placed entirely upon the spirit, and the spirit is perceived to be separate from the intellect, according to the particular model of man our friend subscribes to.

I think that if you read some of Andrews posting's you will find that he does much study as well as leaning on the Holy Spirit for illimunition of what he has studied. However, I will let him answer for himself.

I believe study to very important; "study to show thyself approved" comes to mind. I have seen many though study themselves right out of that "child-like" faith that Jesus said we need to have. They start reasoning everything out according to human understanding and what makes sense as a human. They reason away God's promises for them here on earth and exclude everything to a "someday" in the sweet by and by.

I would suggest that there is a more balanced approach that combines the subjective and the intellectual components of our constitution in harmony. First, we recognise that the theological propositions of the Bible are "true and reasonable" (Acts 26:25) - there is no need to check your brain out at the door when you go to Church. Second, we note the commandment to love God (and thus the things of God) with all our "mind" (Mark 12:30). Third, we acknowledge our need for the Holy Spirit to help us countenance those truths honestly and objectively, since we are sinful and have a hard time facing up to some of the cutting truths of scripture, even as Christians. Would you have problems with this approach to "theology" (or Bible study)?

All for now

Theophilus7

No, I would not have any problem with this approach. . .that's already how I approach God and His Word.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Wonderful, evoking posts brother Theo:

And as a charismatic, I can say that "we" are often found barking. I mean, no, wait, that's not what I mean.

Less intelligent? No, that wouldn't be correct. Generally found avoiding the application of the wonderful gifts of logic and reason to the only consistantly truthful book on the planet? Perhaps. Less willing to work for an attainable goal, "faithfully resting" on the fact that all things should be at our disposal through the infinite resources of our Lord? Undoubtedly. We as charismatics desire wisdom without thought, knowledge without learning, obtainment without striving. It's really sad, and has cut the legs out from under the Divine purpose for that little thing we like to call "Time".

I don't know what group of Charasmatic's you hang out with deg but this certaintly does not describe the one's I hang out with. Wisdom is knowing how to apply knowledge. . .and that can only be received from Wisdom Himself.

Keep tickling them, Theo...With the right words, even a cemetary can spring to life.

What exactly are you insinuating here?

 

[Theophilus7]

I think that if you read some of Andrews posting's you will find that he does much study as well as leaning on the Holy Spirit for illimunition of what he has studied. However, I will let him answer for himself.

I don't doubt it. However, a person can be a lot of things and not be consistent. I would suggest that the position stated, which I commented on, has a definite propensity to denigrate the mind's role in determining sound doctrine, even if the particular adherent in this case has not succumbed to this tendency in practical terms.

I believe study to very important; "study to show thyself approved" comes to mind. I have seen many though study themselves right out of that "child-like" faith that Jesus said we need to have...

Certainly, a person ought to know the difference between ministerial and magisterial reasoning. The former is prepared to figure within the confines of scripture, the later is ready to sit in judgement over scripture itself [eg so-called "higher criticism"]. Certainly, it is not the later attitude I would encourage.

No, I would not have any problem with this approach. . .that's already how I approach God and His Word.

Theophilus7

 

[Theophilus7]

Wonderful, evoking posts brother Theo

Thanks deg.

 

[Follower of Christ too]

I am an educated person. (Tho sometimes when I read my own post I wonder where my spelling came from).....All my life I loved learning and reading.So I think that Deg may be referring to the fact that once you come to know God, all you want is more. This would be spending a lot of time in reading the bible and prayer. I think of verses like: God uses the foolish things of this earth to confound the wise, and I become a fool for Christ sake. I know that a lot of other christians who haven't came to understand gifts that God gives us look at me like I am a little off! We all are familiar with the term 'them holy rollers'.......So, in view of what God has done for me I have had to come to see things through scripture and not evolution or science. The word of God became the most important thing in my life.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

I don't doubt it. However, a person can be a lot of things and not be consistent. I would suggest that the position stated, which I commented on, has a definite propensity to denigrate the mind's role in determining sound doctrine, even if the particular adherent in this case has not succumbed to this tendency in practical terms.

Are you claiming Theophilus that you are perfectly consistent in everything you say and do and there is absoutly no variation between them?

Scripture says, "may this mind which was in Christ Jesus be in you." In order for this to be accomplished we much not only study His Word but we must be bringing our minds into subjection to Him and we are told to "renew" our minds daily.

Certainly, a person ought to know the difference between ministerial and magisterial reasoning. The former is prepared to figure within the confines of scripture, the later is ready to sit in judgement over scripture itself [eg so-called "higher criticism"]. Certainly, it is not the later attitude I would encourage.




Theophilus7

I'm not suggesting that liberties be taken beyond scripture. . .but. . . can we trust our finite little minds to fully understand where those borders are? Is it possible that the Spirit might tell us to do something that absolutely insults our thinking processes but yet is completely in line with The Word. . just that we have not understood it yet.

Are we not to obey the moment we hear that voice that said, "My sheep know My voice and the voice of another they will not follow?"

As long as it's not in direct violation of what scripture teaches, and of course that is up for debate also, then just because we don't understand it does not mean that it is not so.