Do you ever have trouble knowing the right thing to do?

I’ve recently listened to a number of presentations by a very smart man about “discernment.” I won’t name the speaker because I’m not certain I understood exactly what he said and I don’t want to misrepresent his position.

Basically, here’s what I heard:

1. There’s always a highest, best right in every situation.
2. Everyone can learn to discern that highest, best right.
3. If discernment is thorough and honest, there will be no disagreement about the highest, best action. As I understood the notion, if my version of right differs from yours, one of us must be “more right.”

I wasn’t sure if I agreed, or even understood, so I spent some time researching discernment. As usual, I discovered that I’ve been guilty of some pretty fuzzy thinking.

In general usage, we tend to use the terms discernment and wisdom interchangeably. In fact, some sources list them as synonyms. While there’s certainly some overlap, I think there are subtle-but-important distinctions. They’re even listed as distinct spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12.

The discussions in which I encountered these notions were not overtly faith-based, but I happen to know that the presenter is a committed follower of Jesus. So I decided to seek an understanding of discernment from a biblical perspective.

I checked several sources, including major denominational web sites, for definitions. Not surprisingly, they didn’t all agree. (Interesting aside—a search of one very large denomination’s site returned no specific information concerning spiritual gifts. They did, however, provide ample discussion on the “spiritual” blessings of “giving,” including estate planning advice and a ranked list of regional contributions.)

Sorting through the semantics, here’s what emerged as my understanding:

Discernment is more accurately labeled as “discernment of spirits.” It’s the gift of determining whether a particular teaching or behavior is from God, Satan, or human. Discernment is a matter of intuition and insight, and may be based on a sense of being in touch with the Spirit on a heart level. As one source described it, discernment is a type of knowing at a visceral level that transcends empirical knowledge.

Wisdom is the gift of applying knowledge and spiritual truths in practical, everyday situations. Wisdom allows one to make connections, understand root causes, and see the deeper implications of beliefs and actions. Wisdom leads to the best individual and group decisions.

OBSERVATIONS

Based on my understanding, here’s what I think I know about discernment.

1.    There’s always a highest, best right in every situation.

From my perspective, this is obviously true. God’s will is always the highest, best course of action. Basically, the answer to “What Would Jesus Do?” would represent the highest, best right.

2.    Everyone can learn to discern that highest, best right.

I’m not sure about this one. Theologically, discernment is a gift of the Spirit. As I understand it, some people will be better “discerners” than others because that’s their gift. So while everyone can and should practice discernment, some folks are given the ability to discern at deeper, more accurate levels.

Practically, even the most gifted human cannot completely know God’s thoughts. We can pray and seek guidance, but I’m not sure anyone can always know God’s will with absolute certainty.

3.    If discernment is thorough and honest, there will be no disagreement about the highest, best action. As I understood the notion, if my version of right differs from yours, one of us must be “more right.”

Theoretically, this conclusion follows from #1. Any behavior or thought must either be “right” or “not right.” God’s will is a very small target—you either hit it or you don’t.

On a practical level, I can’t envision a situation in which individuals can ignore deeply-held personal biases and beliefs. We may agree on the existence of ultimate truth in all circumstances, but I doubt our ability to agree on the precise nature of that truth.

So … ?

I began with a question: Do you ever have trouble knowing the right thing to do?

Of course the question is rhetorical. I’m sure we all agree that knowing what’s right is a struggle. But I think there’s an even tougher, more convicting question: When you know what’s right, do you do it?

I’m thinking that this whole debate about absolute truth and not knowing God’s perfect will for every situation might be a smokescreen.

As long as I operate with a limited human brain I’ll encounter circumstances in which I’m uncertain about what’s right. No amount of prayer, discipline, or searching will alter that fact of human nature. As Paul writes [1 Corinthians 13:12], “Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.”

God’s thoughts will always retain an element of mystery—at least on this side of eternity. But mystery doesn’t mean I know nothing, it simply means I don’t know everything.

Someday I’ll know for sure. In the meantime, I believe that I need to focus on the truth I know. If I do that, I believe God will show me the truth I need to know.

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. [1 Corinthians 13:13]

• Did you enjoy this article? Please leave a comment or send me an email.
• Please use the icons below to share this article.
• Want to receive free updates? You can follow by RSS, or email updates.

Related articles:

Evidence

How To Change Without Changing

Tend The Flame

Happy Monday. I hope your week’s off to a great start.

Monday’s word-of-the-week day, and this week’s word is discernment.

I encountered this term last week in a wonderful workshop offered by Gus Lee. Gus talked about courage and leadership, and one of his key points was that courageous leaders must exercise discernment.

In this context, discernment implies searching beyond what is obvious or superficial. It’s developing and exercising the power to distinguish and select what is true or appropriate or excellent.

Discernment seeks to understand what’s right, true, and best. It searches deeper than what’s expedient or acceptable.

I think I was struck most by Gus’ statement that discernment isn’t values-neutral. It operates from the premise that absolute truth exists. In a culture drowning in moral and ethical relativism, discernment involves the difficult quest to know what’s really right.

Discernment thinks long-term, digging to uncover elusive eternal truths that supersede cultural norms and rules. It recognizes that such a search involves life-long learning and a willingness to grow and learn as wisdom develops. It demands change in the face of new discovery and understanding.

Here are a couple of ideas I scribbled as I thought about being a person of discernment.

• What’s right? is a better question than What’s legal?
• What’s true? is more useful than What’s everyone else believe?
• What’s best? is better than What works?
• Good enough is never good enough in matters of truth.
• Wisdom is more important than knowledge.
• What’s right? gets me closer to truth than What are my rights?

Discernment isn’t easy or comfortable. Worthwhile goals seldom are.

This is also Word-of-Mouth Day, when I kindly encourage (or, from your perspective, pester) you to help spread the word about Bouncing Back. Today’s request is simple:

Forward the link to someone who might be interested. Help us grow the circle by suggesting this site to others who might like to join the discussion.

Thanks for all of your help and support.

Remember not only to say the right thing in the right place, but far more difficult still, to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment. Benjamin Franklin

It’s a lot easier to assert my rights than to act responsibly.

Earlier this week I described a minor but distasteful incident. I expressed regret for my inappropriate attitude of entitlement regarding a handicapped parking space. I received some interesting feedback.

One reader essentially told me I had no reason to apologize because people shouldn’t use those spaces if they don’t need them. Another said I really did nothing wrong because I kept my anger to myself. I appreciate the support, but I disagree.

Philosopher Immanuel Kant said. “In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so.”

Jesus proclaimed the same principle. “You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” [Matthew 5:27-28]

Attitudes and motives are more significant than legalities. No law requires me to regard others respectfully. In fact, I have the right to think poorly of others and to treat them rudely.

Athletes and coaches scream at officials. Politicians, even the President, are considered legitimate targets for derogatory outbursts. Drivers curse and offer profane gestures for perceived incompetence. Political pundits utter outrageous and inflammatory statements. These and many other verbal assaults are excused because we have the “right” to express ourselves. It’s an attitude of entitlement that begins when rights are asserted without considering corresponding responsibilities.

Perhaps our Bill Of Rights should be accompanied by a Bill Of Responsibilities.

Every individual deserves to be regarded and treated with dignity and respect. When I ignore that principle, which unfortunately happens far too frequently, I hope I’ll acknowledge my personal failure.

I hope I won’t hide behind my right to do what clearly isn’t right.

What would you list in a “Bill Of Responsibilities”?

Right is right, even if everyone is against it; and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it. William Penn

I hope you’ll take a look at my new e-book titled STICKS AND STONES: Finding Freedom In The Face Of Criticism. It’s a free PDF download. You can click the link in the sidebar or go to my resources page to download.

Did you enjoy this article? Please leave a comment, visit my website, and/or send me an email at rich@richdixon.net.

Subscribe to receive updates by Email

Related articles:

An Imitator Of Jesus

Rose Colored Glasses

The Strength To Be Gentle

Criticism vs Feedback

 An ethical person ought to do more than he’s required to do and less than he’s allowed to do.

You can’t mandate morality.

Call it what you want—morality, ethics, or character can’t be codified. Laws, rules, and regulations are always lowest common denominators. Attempts to legislate moral behavior simply create a cottage industry aimed at finding loopholes or avoiding detection.

I think that’s one of our biggest dilemmas as a society. We seem to believe that “legal” equals “ethical” and debate endlessly the government’s proper role in determining “right” behavior. But it’s simply a fact that the best laws can do is determine minimum standards, and those can never be the same as proper ethics.

As a wheelchair user, I see this principle constantly in the public access requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). People use reserved parking spaces “legally” because they have someone else’s permit. Ramps or doors meet ADA requirements but are difficult to access because or location. Accessible seats at a ballpark are more desirable because they have a bit more legroom.

This isn’t intended as a complaint. I appreciate the ADA both for access requirements and for the awareness it’s created. The ADA is really a legal acknowledgment of society’s collective belief that everyone should be able to contribute to, and participate in, public activities.

But the ADA, like any law, can’t change the hearts of those who seek ways to circumvent its spirit. Morality isn’t concerned much with what I’m allowed to do, because it’s about doing what I know I ought to do. Ethics isn’t about my rights; it’s about what’s right.

Ethical questions are difficult, because they arise in the grey areas that can’t be legislated. Some would argue that right and wrong are relative, but I disagree. Just because a concept can’t be neatly wrapped in words with no ambiguities or gaps doesn’t mean it’s nonexistent or irrelevant.

I believe that absolute truth and right exist. I also believe that the best I can do is a closer approximation of behaviors that align with what’s right. My goals are to proclaim truth and do right as I understand them and to always seek deeper, better understanding.

Tomorrow I’ll talk about my filter for ethical choices.

What’s your take on ethics, morals, and laws?

One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.” Martin Luther King, Jr. 

I hope you’ll take a look at my new e-book titled STICKS AND STONES: Finding Freedom In The Face Of Criticism. It’s a free PDF download. You can click the link in the sidebar or go to my resources page to download.

Did you enjoy this article? Please leave a comment, visit my website, and/or send me an email at rich@richdixon.net.

Subscribe to receive updates by Email

Related articles:

Where Aren’t You Trying To Go?

The Strength To Be Gentle

Criticism vs Feedback