Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Submissive or Suppressed Wills | Luke 22:42 | DocTrinsograce | 166517 | ||
Dear Mark, No, I can't find anyone suggesting that the heart, in Scripture, is not to be taken literally. The dichotomy and trichotomy stuff entered the world through the pagan Greeks, an idea alien to Hebrews. The Hebrews thought of men as unified beings. Death, an abnormal condition, would be resolved in the resurrection. We also carry around a lot of baggage from Gnostic teachings on this topic. Perhaps it would be helpful to consider the similar way the average American thinks of the brain. The modern man does not expect to cut into a brain and find the real person. The Hebrew would not have expected to cut into a heart and find the real person. The modern man does not use the term brain as a metaphor. The ancient Hebrew man did not use the term heart as a metaphor. Both understand that a blob of tissue exists, but both tend to think of it as somehow containing a man's essence. The "center of man" is probably as good a phrase as any. Essence might work... All our words don't quite sum it up very well. Maybe we shouldn't even try. After all, if the Bible calls it "heart" we should just use the same language, in spite of all the English stuff we carry along with the word. On the other topic: Looking at the context of 1 Corinthians 2:8 one does not find any reference to demons. Paul is assuring his readers that the Gospel is not based in the wisdom of men but the power of God (v5). The comparisons are persuasive speech (v1) versus the testimony of God (v2) and man's wisdom (v4) versus power of the Holy Spirit (v4). The wisdom of the world and the men ruling in the world comes "to nought" (v7), but God's wisdom is eternal and infallible (v7), but is unknown to the men ruling in the world (v8). (Albert Barnes comments on this verse, "referring both to the Jewish rulers, and the Roman governor." John Gill and Matthew Henry concur.) Had the Jewish rulers and Roman governors understood what was involved, they would not have crucified Christ (v8). Sorry, I didn't "just set it aside." I'd really like to know if there is explicit Scriptural support for "demonic influence" in the Crucifiction. I've always assumed that there was -- even before seeing Mel Gibson's movie :-) -- but I hadn't thought it through until your chance comment. After searching the Scriptures I couldn't find an explicit statement to support the view. Now, this doesn't mean that it can't be rightly inferred... after all, we have that Judas passage... I just thought you might have seen a specific Scripture on the topic that I had missed. Questions aren't always challenges, Brother Mark... sometimes they are requests to improve our imperfect understanding. Sorry for getting you upset. In Him, Doc |
||||||
2 | Submissive or Suppressed Wills | Luke 22:42 | mark d seyler | 166520 | ||
Hi Doc, So then, you think that when Jeremiah wrote that the heart of man was incurably sick, the their concept was such that if they were to cut man open, they would find a diseased organ, and that was the cause of their spiritual ills? It does not seem like you that you would, although that is what your argument demands. Myself, I give these ancients more credit than that, in understanding that the expression conveys more than what would be described as literally true. But even we Americans use "heart" not just to mean a muscle, but also the center, or root, such as "the heart of the matter" or the "heart of the earth". Well, I suppose I should stop beating. This horse stopped moving a long time ago. Love in Christ, Mark |
||||||
3 | Submissive or Suppressed Wills | Luke 22:42 | DocTrinsograce | 166542 | ||
Dear Brother Mark, That is precisely what I do not think nor did I say that nor did I suggest anything of the sort. (I seem to recall a recent post on something about fences having two sides.) Let me try one more time, no doubt the fault is in my poor skills of self expression. If you disagree, let's just set it aside. The ancients assumed that human essence somehow/mysteriously had its residence in the heart in the same way that moderns assume that human essence somehow/mysteriously has its residence in the brain. (I read some time ago that the ancients thought the brain itself was simply some kind of organ for cooling the blood. The Egyptians would carefully preserve a dead man's heart, but they will throw away the brain as unimportant.) However, the ancients differed from moderns in distinguishing the organ itself from the essential person. They considered it all a single thing -- both what you would see when you cut into someone and who they really were. The ancients did not see a dichotomy between the physical and the spiritual, as is our wont. When they spoke of the heart they meant the essence of a man, en toto. When Jeremiah spoke of the heart being incurably diseased, he meant that man is fundamentally, from his essence outwards, rotten. When he talked about trees, roots, droughts, and fruit in that passage, THOSE were metaphors. As you are learning in your studies -- and no doubt know better than do I -- the Greek is much more precise about such things than is English or Hebrew. In Greek there are distinctions between the heart and mind. (Which is why Jesus modified the Great Commandment in Luke 10:27 from how it was articulated in Deuteronomy 6:5. Moses exact words make perfect sense to the Hebrew and English speakers, but they are decidedly inadequate to Greek speakers.) I've checked again, but I find no passage that warrants thinking of the heart as a metaphor. I also find no Bible scholar or commentator making that assertion. ...not that my searches are exhaustive or that I am incapable of error. In Him, Doc |
||||||