• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Interfaith Thoughts Requested

Axe Elf

Prophet
My love of this Bible verse came up today in another thread. It is certainly one of my favorite verses of all time, if not my most favorite--and I think it applies across religions, even those that may not necessarily recognize a deity in the traditional sense. I would very much be interested to hear how it resonates with everyone else.

"But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him]."
--1 Corinthians 2:15 (Amplified Bible)

I don't want to say too much about it myself, at this point, but I do want to make it clear that I don't think that it literally means to "try" everything, like heroin and bestiality and whatever else--but to put everything on trial, evaluate everything for yourself.

I'm listening...
 

Curious George

Veteran Member
Though I am not sure we are going to see eye to eye, I find it interesting that this verse resonates with you: You, a Cristian who does not believe in free will, and me, an atheist that does.

The verse does not resonate with me at all. I believe that it tries to assert that there is a part of us which can interact with the physical world and reason with spiritual guidance while maintaining that such reasoning is distinct from philosophical reasoning.

If you were to ask me to accept this as true and then ask how can this be so, I would offer that the author is trying to describe an ability to understand the noumenal world instead of the phenomenal world by virtue of revealed knowledge. It is at its heart a claim to see Truth when others see illusion.

On a side note: to judge is to exert control. This entails free will.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Interesting verse. Verse 11 has something interesting to say in the context of this. "For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them?" This is one reason why in the other thread I've been making the point about how rational thought without spiritual experience leaves a very lopsided and inaccurate understanding. However within the context of spiritual experience, rational understanding become illuminated and the meaning suddenly changes into something that wasn't understood before. And so it is with the passage above you quote.

Context is everything. Without spiritual awareness, and I do not mean reading bible verses or learning about religious truths being considered as spiritual Awareness, someone only has their thoughts they can turn to to assess, judge, evaluate, examine, etc. But assessments, judgements, discernments, etc, within the context of experience, one "out-contextualizes" those who lack it. It's like the difference between someone who has studied about all things France yet has never been there, as opposed to someone who lives there full time. Reading and learning about God is not the same as living in God. Believing in Jesus religiously is not close to the same thing as "having the mind of Christ".

So in the verse above, "The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments", that "merely human judgements" is what I would say one's cognitive thoughts alone. As far as others not be qualified to judge the person who is Aware of the things of the Spirit, this too makes sense of course. They lack the necessary Context in order to see and understand where that other person comes from, they lack the context of experience. It's like non-scientists judging the theory of evolution. They aren't qualified to weigh in on the discussion. It's not simply a matter of different beliefs, but different experiences and expertise. Someone learning woodworking in school is not the same as someone who is a skilled craftsman.
 
Last edited:

Curious George

Veteran Member
They lack the necessary Context in order to see and understand where that other person comes from, they lack the context of experience. It's like non-scientists judging the theory of evolution. They aren't qualified to weigh in on the discussion. It's not simply a matter of different beliefs, but different experiences and expertise

Don't you think this is a dangerous idea when you are proposing something that is inaccessible to others as a qualification?

It is an interesting thought though I have a feeling it works both ways. I am pretty sure that upon returning to the cave a person would indeed not be able to judge the shadows on the wall too well. The consequence? Is it that the spiritually aware no longer have the expertise and experience too judge natural things?
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
My love of this Bible verse came up today in another thread. It is certainly one of my favorite verses of all time, if not my most favorite--and I think it applies across religions, even those that may not necessarily recognize a deity in the traditional sense. I would very much be interested to hear how it resonates with everyone else.

"But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him]."
--1 Corinthians 2:15 (Amplified Bible)

I don't want to say too much about it myself, at this point, but I do want to make it clear that I don't think that it literally means to "try" everything, like heroin and bestiality and whatever else--but to put everything on trial, evaluate everything for yourself.

I'm listening...
Paul, characteristically puts a dichotomy between the world and God that I, as a monist, find difficult to swallow. He is also a bit too quick to condemn stuff up, down and sideways. Here is NRSV,

Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. 13 And we speak of these things in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual things to those who are spiritual.

14 Those who are unspiritual do not receive the gifts of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to them, and they are unable to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15 Those who are spiritual discern all things, and they are themselves subject to no one else’s scrutiny.

A bit too "us vs them" - ism going on here. Makes me feel fidgety.
 

JM Hardwick

SkyguyMasterDiver
Curious George, as with pretty much everything that cannot be observed or reproduced, faith is required. When someone has faith in something, it colors their interpretation of the thing. Even as an atheist, you have to have faith that God doesn’t exist, because you can’t prove it otherwise. Kinda hard to prove a negative. Axe Elf’s love of the Bible stems from his faith that what is written in the Bible is true.

I totally agree with Windwalker that context is everything. If one is not familiar with and has faith in the overall story told in the Bible, and the many smaller vignettes used to further illuminate and/or explain the big picture, then confusion can set up regarding one or two scriptures here and there.

Axe Elf, look at the context of 1 Corinthians 2:15. Interpret it literally, historically, and compare scripture with scripture to find the context, then you’ll Better understand the message about which Paul was writing.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Don't you think this is a dangerous idea when you are proposing something that is inaccessible to others as a qualification?
It is accessible to others. They just have to follow the injunctions in order to gain experience. Think of it like a novice saying to the Zen Master, "There is no Emptiness. I've never experienced it." If he instead follows the injunctions and does the necessary practices in order to have such a experience, then he is qualified to weigh in on it, but not before.

It is an interesting thought though I have a feeling it works both ways. I am pretty sure that upon returning to the cave a person would indeed not be able to judge the shadows on the wall too well. The consequence? Is it that the spiritually aware no longer have the expertise and experience too judge natural things?
No, it's not like that. It's like saying though I'm now 50 years old, I have no idea what it was like to be 30, or 20, or 10. You don't suddenly develop amnesia. :) On the contrary, because you transcend and include what came before, your context is much larger than before when you didn't have that. I think saying experience illuminates understanding is the most accurate way to depict this.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
My love of this Bible verse came up today in another thread. It is certainly one of my favorite verses of all time, if not my most favorite--and I think it applies across religions, even those that may not necessarily recognize a deity in the traditional sense. I would very much be interested to hear how it resonates with everyone else.

"But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him]."
--1 Corinthians 2:15 (Amplified Bible)

I don't want to say too much about it myself, at this point, but I do want to make it clear that I don't think that it literally means to "try" everything, like heroin and bestiality and whatever else--but to put everything on trial, evaluate everything for yourself.

I'm listening...
I don't think it makes much sense to my version of Hinduism. Firstly, there is no clarity about 'the spiritual man' as to what that means. Does it mean 'enlightened man' or does it mean your average Joe who is religious? What does it mean to be put on trial? What does it mean to be judged? That statement 'put on trial and judged by no one' just seems so contradictory in and of itself.

But as is common, the vagueness of Abrahamic scripture often doesn't transfer well into the eastern paradigm.

The last part, if and only if we're talking about an enlightened being, does make sense. Capturing His essence is indeed impossible to discern, as only a mystical experience will allow for something outside of the intellect and words. Same as not being able to understand what it feels like to sky dive, unless you do it.
 
Last edited:

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Self and other. I versus them. Us against them...

This is how a dualist thinks. Especially an unreflective one.
However, instead of "Us against them", why can't dualism be "Us AND them"? In fact, Unity, requires diversity. Uniformity, or "sameness" is not the same thing as Unity. Dualism does not have to be animosity. That's an expression of ego, not Love. Love can and does exist within dualism.
 

JM Hardwick

SkyguyMasterDiver
What @sayak83 said. Abrahamic morality is often too dualistic to seem very useful to an eastern perspective. We see all the ills plaguing western society. Some of these ills IMO are rooted directly in dualism.

Self and other. I versus them. Us against them...

This is how a dualist thinks. Especially an unreflective one.

All religions have history which conflict with their religious teachings. That is the magic of forgiveness. I’m not expert, for sure, on this aspect with regards to Buddhism, but it only takes a quick Google search to find the skeletons in the Buddhist closets.

“Us vs them” in the Christian’s eyes is “God vs the devil.” It is the only viewpointto have.
 

JM Hardwick

SkyguyMasterDiver
However, instead of "Us against them", why can't dualism be "Us AND them"? In fact, Unity, requires diversity. Uniformity, or "sameness" is not the same thing as Unity. Dualism does not have to be animosity. That's an expression of ego, not Love. Love can and does exist within dualism.

Doesn’t work in Islam, either.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
My love of this Bible verse came up today in another thread. It is certainly one of my favorite verses of all time, if not my most favorite--and I think it applies across religions, even those that may not necessarily recognize a deity in the traditional sense. I would very much be interested to hear how it resonates with everyone else.

"But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him]."
--1 Corinthians 2:15 (Amplified Bible)

I don't want to say too much about it myself, at this point, but I do want to make it clear that I don't think that it literally means to "try" everything, like heroin and bestiality and whatever else--but to put everything on trial, evaluate everything for yourself.

I'm listening...
I fail to see what spirituality has to do with free inquiry. I really don't see why spirituality would need to co-opt free inquiry and claim that it's specifically a spiritual thing.
 

JM Hardwick

SkyguyMasterDiver
However, instead of "Us against them", why can't dualism be "Us AND them"? In fact, Unity, requires diversity. Uniformity, or "sameness" is not the same thing as Unity. Dualism does not have to be animosity. That's an expression of ego, not Love. Love can and does exist within dualism.

Depends upon your definition of unity.

Your own ego may be causing you to see things as animosity.

We, as Christians, consider the following.

1 Corinthians 2:13-14 NIV
[13] This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. [14] The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

I’m no expert, but my elementary Google searches this morning tell me that Buddhism, Hinduism, atheism, “no ism” all involve dualism in one way or the other, because they all cause a person to have to make a choice. Do I want to based upon what is taught, or do I not want to?

But...what’s in a word, right? Wouldn’t want to go to Hell or whatever other negative dimension based upon a word.
 

JM Hardwick

SkyguyMasterDiver
I fail to see what spirituality has to do with free inquiry. I really don't see why spirituality would need to co-opt free inquiry and claim that it's specifically a spiritual thing.
Interesting verse. Verse 11 has something interesting to say in the context of this. "For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them?" This is one reason why in the other thread I've been making the point about how rational thought without spiritual experience leaves a very lopsided and inaccurate understanding. However within the context of spiritual experience, rational understanding become illuminated and the meaning suddenly changes into something that wasn't understood before. And so it is with the passage above you quote.

Context is everything. Without spiritual awareness, and I do not mean reading bible verses or learning about religious truths being considered as spiritual Awareness, someone only has their thoughts they can turn to to assess, judge, evaluate, examine, etc. But assessments, judgements, discernments, etc, within the context of experience, one "out-contextualizes" those who lack it. It's like the difference between someone who has studied about all things France yet has never been there, as opposed to someone who lives there full time. Reading and learning about God is not the same as living in God. Believing in Jesus religiously is not close to the same thing as "having the mind of Christ".

So in the verse above, "The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments", that "merely human judgements" is what I would say one's cognitive thoughts alone. As far as others not be qualified to judge the person who is Aware of the things of the Spirit, this too makes sense of course. They lack the necessary Context in order to see and understand where that other person comes from, they lack the context of experience. It's like non-scientists judging the theory of evolution. They aren't qualified to weigh in on the discussion. It's not simply a matter of different beliefs, but different experiences and expertise. Someone learning woodworking in school is not the same as someone who is a skilled craftsman.

It depends on how you define love.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
However, instead of "Us against them", why can't dualism be "Us AND them"? In fact, Unity, requires diversity. Uniformity, or "sameness" is not the same thing as Unity. Dualism does not have to be animosity. That's an expression of ego, not Love. Love can and does exist within dualism.
No. That is just fine. Question is whether Paul thought this way or not.
 

JM Hardwick

SkyguyMasterDiver
I fail to see what spirituality has to do with free inquiry. I really don't see why spirituality would need to co-opt free inquiry and claim that it's specifically a spiritual thing.

I don’t see your free inquiry as being co-opted. I see your frustration because you’re not spiritual. Spirituality is not some special, magical state of mind. It comes with the willingness and faith to believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, Word of God, and truth from cover to cover. It comes from searching the Bible for answers and using the Bible as the sole source for those answers.

When Jesus was at the well talking to the Samaritan woman he told her the following.

John 4:23-24 NIV
[23] Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. [24] God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

Here He combines spirituality with truth. The truth makes no sense to those who are not spiritual. They read the words but never understand the meaning or the message delivered by those words. It’s not mystical, magical, or vaporous, but it does take courage to lay aside what you feel in your heart to make room for other feelings.

John 8:31-32 NIV
[31] To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. [32] Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”

Amen!
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
My love of this Bible verse came up today in another thread. It is certainly one of my favorite verses of all time, if not my most favorite--and I think it applies across religions, even those that may not necessarily recognize a deity in the traditional sense. I would very much be interested to hear how it resonates with everyone else.

"But the spiritual man tries all things [he examines, investigates, inquires into, questions, and discerns all things], yet is himself to be put on trial and judged by no one [he can read the meaning of everything, but no one can properly discern or appraise or get an insight into him]."
--1 Corinthians 2:15 (Amplified Bible)

I don't want to say too much about it myself, at this point, but I do want to make it clear that I don't think that it literally means to "try" everything, like heroin and bestiality and whatever else--but to put everything on trial, evaluate everything for yourself.

I'm listening...
it echoes a simple script that I DO practice....

Trust no one.....question everything

am I a cynic?......yeah well....gulity
am I above judgment by God and heaven?......no
am I looking forward to a reward I think I have earned?.....

I'll be lucky if I can sneak in through the window
 

JM Hardwick

SkyguyMasterDiver
I don't think it makes much sense to my version of Hinduism. Firstly, there is no clarity about 'the spiritual man' as to what that means. Does it mean 'enlightened man' or does it mean your average Joe who is religious? What does it mean to be put on trial? What does it mean to be judged? That statement 'put on trial and judged by no one' just seems so contradictory in and of itself.

But as is common, the vagueness of Abrahamic scripture often doesn't transfer well into the eastern paradigm.

The last part, if and only if we're talking about an enlightened being, does make sense. Capturing His essence is indeed impossible to discern, as only a mystical experience will allow for something outside of the intellect and words. Same as not being able to understand what it feels like to sky dive, unless you do it.


Spirituality involves a change of heart based upon experience, just the same as being unspiritual required a change of heart based upon experience.
 
Top