The Holy Spirit and the heart...

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

The above is a statement of truth for people to discuss.

If however you do not think it is truth' date=' you are free to discuss your reasons why your own understanding if it differs is truth.

[/quote']so it is the second bolded part according to what you say here?

Do you wish to condemn or engage in discussion Teresa?

[Twilight]

Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Quote:

heart:

G2588 kardia

Prolonged from a primary κάρ kar (Latin cor, “heart”); the heart, that is, (figuratively) the thoughts or feelings (mind); also (by analogy) the middle: - (+ broken-) heart (-ed).

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

Heb 8:10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

Quote:

heart:

G2588 kardia

Prolonged from a primary κάρ kar (Latin cor, “heart”); the heart, that is, (figuratively) the thoughts or feelings (mind); also (by analogy) the middle: - (+ broken-) heart (-ed).

Why have you only included the section here that agrees with your argument Teresa?

What about the primary meaning of the word "Kardia":

1) the heart

a) that organ in the animal body which is the centre of the circulation of the blood, and hence was regarded as the seat of physical life

is that in your strongs definitions?

if you went looking for a different definition why are you accusing me of not including the "whole"?

tsk, tsk,

Exo 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Deu 19:18 if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;

Deu 19:19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

Do you wish to condemn or engage in discussion Teresa?

a very wise lady says that we accuse others of what we are guilty of.

[pnattmbtc]

I am talking about the biblical exposition of what the human heart is and does.

Which is never stated as a "blood pumping muscle".

[pnattmbtc]

Me:a word which had a meaning in antiquity to convey a function of the mind,

Mark:How do you know that this is the case?

That it is trying express a function of the mind when it says heart?

[pnattmbtc]

Regarding #316174, you didn't consider my argument at all, as far as I can tell. Please re-read post #315519, and if you wish to comment on the arguments I made there, I'll be happy to respond. If you simply repeat what you were saying before, as if I hadn't written anything, I don't see how I can respond contructively. This just becomes a "Is so!" "Is not!" conversation.

A discussion, to move along, has to have some exchange of information, giving and taking, where one reads what another says, considers it, tries to understand it, and then responds to the points made. In my post about kidneys, you apparently didn't even notice I was talking not about the heart, but about kidneys. I don't know how you could possibly have missed this. In your post #316174, I already answered the arguments you made, but you didn't respond to what I said, as far as I can tell. My responding to your post would simply be my repeating my post #315519.

I do have a question to ask. What do you think the heart is? On the one hand you claim it is "literal," but on the other hand, deny it is a blood-pumping muscle, which is what it would be if it were literal. You agree with me that it is the center of our desires and motives, yet also disagree with me on this point. These are contradictions, making it difficult to understand what your thought is.

[SivartM]

I think the most important problem is when someone gets a kidney removed. How does this affect the process of proving their kidneys? Is the proof only half as accurate?

[teresaq]

I am talking about the biblical exposition of what the human heart is and does.

Which is never stated as a "blood pumping muscle".

The inference you place on the heart here, precludes any other consideration of the meaning, design and purpose of the heart that God originally gave.

The heart is not a "blood pumping" muscle, but an organ that has the capacity to think in a strong limited sense.

where does the bible say what you are saying it does?

where is there any hint in the bible that God gave us a different kind of heart than what we now have?

[pnattmbtc]

In the Hebrew, the word for "heart" is translated "mind" or "understanding" a fair number of times. In the Greek, Strong's has as a part of its definition:

Quote:

a) the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours

of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence

"The faculty and seat of the intelligence" sounds pretty much exactly what I said. Bearing in mind from the SOP:

Quote:

The brain nerves which communicate with the entire system are the only medium through which Heaven can communicate to man, and affect his inmost life.(CH 616)

it makes sense that the heart has to do with the activity of our minds. Indeed, it's difficult to conceive what else it could be. Given the "heart" is the "faculty and seat of the intelligence," the "soul or mind, as it is the found and seat of the thoughts ..." it seems clear this must be involving the mind.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

I am talking about the biblical exposition of what the human heart is and does.

Which is never stated as a "blood pumping muscle".

You said it was "literal." The heart, literally speaking, is a blood pumping muscle.

Where in the bible does it ever express the heart is just a pump?

This is a premise you have supplied in your argument.

Not the bible.

The bible always represents the heart as having "faculties".

Which you deny.

Your argument is that when it describes the heart having faculty, it meas the mind.

But the bible already clearly displays the faculties of the mind.

You are taking the word mind and changing it to heart.

There is no biblical basis for doing this.

---------------

So what is your "authority" for doing this?

For taking the word "mind" and saying it does not mean what it says?

Do you understand my question?

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Me:a word which had a meaning in antiquity to convey a function of the mind,

Mark:How do you know that this is the case?

That it is trying express a function of the mind when it says heart?

It didn't say "heart." It said "kidneys." Did you read the post?

Quote:

Upon what biblical basis are you making this claim?

You apparently didn't read the post, or didn't pay attention, because it says nothing about "heart" but about "kidneys." Please re-read the post, and after doing so, please let me know if you think that when it says the Lord proves the "kidneys" if you think this is speaking of the literal organ.

Can you supply the quote in the KJV please?

[Twilight]

Regarding #316174, you didn't consider my argument at all, as far as I can tell. Please re-read post #315519, and if you wish to comment on the arguments I made there, I'll be happy to respond. If you simply repeat what you were saying before, as if I hadn't written anything, I don't see how I can respond contructively. This just becomes a "Is so!" "Is not!" conversation.

A discussion, to move along, has to have some exchange of information, giving and taking, where one reads what another says, considers it, tries to understand it, and then responds to the points made. In my post about kidneys, you apparently didn't even notice I was talking not about the heart, but about kidneys. I don't know how you could possibly have missed this. In your post #316174, I already answered the arguments you made, but you didn't respond to what I said, as far as I can tell. My responding to your post would simply be my repeating my post #315519.

I do have a question to ask. What do you think the heart is? On the one hand you claim it is "literal," but on the other hand, deny it is a blood-pumping muscle, which is what it would be if it were literal. You agree with me that it is the center of our desires and motives, yet also disagree with me on this point. These are contradictions, making it difficult to understand what your thought is.

The heart is a physcial organ that has "mental" function.

Just as the brain is an organ and has "mental" function.

Mark

[Twilight]

In the Hebrew, the word for "heart" is translated "mind" or "understanding" a fair number of times. In the Greek, Strong's has as a part of its definition:

Quote:

a) the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours

of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence

"The faculty and seat of the intelligence" sounds pretty much exactly what I said. Bearing in mind from the SOP:

Quote:

The brain nerves which communicate with the entire system are the only medium through which Heaven can communicate to man, and affect his inmost life.(CH 616)

it makes sense that the heart has to do with the activity of our minds. Indeed, it's difficult to conceive what else it could be. Given the "heart" is the "faculty and seat of the intelligence," the "soul or mind, as it is the found and seat of the thoughts ..." it seems clear this must be involving the mind.

In the Hebrew there is a word for mind and word for heart.

How it has been translated, should be subordinate to its original usage.

Mark

[pnattmbtc]

Where in the bible does it ever express the heart is just a pump?

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

It didn't say "heart." It said "kidneys." Did you read the post?

Quote:

Upon what biblical basis are you making this claim?

You apparently didn't read the post, or didn't pay attention, because it says nothing about "heart" but about "kidneys." Please re-read the post, and after doing so, please let me know if you think that when it says the Lord proves the "kidneys" if you think this is speaking of the literal organ. [/quote']

Can you supply the quote in the KJV please?

See post #315790.

[pnattmbtc]

Me:I do have a question to ask. What do you think the heart is? On the one hand you claim it is "literal," but on the other hand, deny it is a blood-pumping muscle, which is what it would be if it were literal. You agree with me that it is the center of our desires and motives, yet also disagree with me on this point. These are contradictions, making it difficult to understand what your thought is.

Mark:The heart is a physcial organ that has "mental" function.

Just as the brain is an organ and has "mental" function.

Mark

[Twilight]

Literally the heart is a blood-pumping muscle. I deny the heart, in this literal sense you referred to, has "faculties." However, as actually used in Scripture, referring to that which involves "the brain nerves" to use Ellen White's language, the heart has faculties. It's physical location is in the head region, not the chest region. A man's receiving a heart transplant would not change his "heart," as used in Scripture, in any way. It's not literal.

I just want to show the assumption in this argument Pnat:

I deny the heart, in this literal sense you referred to, has "faculties."

Why?

I know you deny this, but why do you deny it?

The bible only ever expresses that the heart has faculties.

So where do you get the idea it does not?

Where do you get the idea, from Gods Word, that the heart does not have faculties?

Have you ever questioned this assumption in your own mind on this point?

----------------

The point I am challenging you on is this:

There is absolutely no biblical basis for your assumption, that the heart does not have "faculties".

There are however plenty of biblical texts which describe the "faculties" of the heart.

-----------------

So let us consider this:

I am saying the heart has faculties, based on what the bible expresses.

You say it does not, but supply no scripture to support your assertion.

-----------------

Please also be assured, this is not an argument of "superiority" of doctrine, but an attempt to identify some assumptions, so that the Holy Spirit can remove these assumptions in your mind and that a glorious truth can be revealed to you.

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

See post #315790.

Consider this note on the word being used here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3629&t=KJV#

It may not neccesarily be translated with the correct meaning.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Me:I do have a question to ask. What do you think the heart is? On the one hand you claim it is "literal," but on the other hand, deny it is a blood-pumping muscle, which is what it would be if it were literal. You agree with me that it is the center of our desires and motives, yet also disagree with me on this point. These are contradictions, making it difficult to understand what your thought is.

Mark:The heart is a physcial organ that has "mental" function.

Just as the brain is an organ and has "mental" function.

Mark

When you say, "The heart is a physcial organ that has "mental" function." you're referring to the physical organ located in the chest region?

Quote:

In the Hebrew there is a word for mind and word for heart.

How it has been translated, should be subordinate to its original usage.

There's also a word for "kidneys," which, like "heart" depicts mental functions. Do you wish to argue that the kidneys have "mental" functions as well? This would be consistent with your logic so far.

Yes to the first question, as this is the only biblical interpretation available.

Please see my note above on the kidney point.

[teresaq]

the verse in question:

Psa 7:9 Oh let the wickedness of the wicked come to an end; but establish the just: for the righteous God trieth the hearts and reins.

H3629 kil-yaw'

Feminine of H3627 (only in the plural); a kidney (as an essential organ); figuratively the mind (as the interior self): - kidneys, reins.

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Me:a word which had a meaning in antiquity to convey a function of the mind,

Mark:How do you know that this is the case?

That it is trying express a function of the mind when it says heart?

It didn't say "heart." It said "kidneys." Did you read the post?

Quote:

Upon what biblical basis are you making this claim?

You apparently didn't read the post, or didn't pay attention, because it says nothing about "heart" but about "kidneys." Please re-read the post, and after doing so, please let me know if you think that when it says the Lord proves the "kidneys" if you think this is speaking of the literal organ.

[pnattmbtc]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

Literally the heart is a blood-pumping muscle. I deny the heart, in this literal sense you referred to, has "faculties." However, as actually used in Scripture, referring to that which involves "the brain nerves" to use Ellen White's language, the heart has faculties. It's physical location is in the head region, not the chest region. A man's receiving a heart transplant would not change his "heart," as used in Scripture, in any way. It's not literal.

I just want to show the assumption in this argument Pnat:

I deny the heart, in this literal sense you referred to, has "faculties."

Why?

I know you deny this, but why do you deny it?

The bible only ever expresses that the heart has faculties.

So where do you get the idea it does not?

Where do you get the idea, from Gods Word, that the heart does not have faculties?

Have you ever questioned this assumption in your own mind on this point?

----------------

The point I am challenging you on is this:

There is absolutely no biblical basis for your assumption, that the heart does not have "faculties".

There are however plenty of biblical texts which describe the "faculties" of the heart.

-----------------

So let us consider this:

I am saying the heart has faculties, based on what the bible expresses.

You say it does not, but supply no scripture to support your assertion.

-----------------

Please also be assured, this is not an argument of "superiority" of doctrine, but an attempt to identify some assumptions, so that the Holy Spirit can remove these assumptions in your mind and that a glorious truth can be revealed to you.

Mark :-)

*You*, not I, have suggested that the heart is literal, which would make it a blood-pumping muscle. When I commented on the heart not having faculties, I was speaking to *your* comment, that it is literal, and thus a blood-pumping muscle, and not to how Scripture uses the term, which I explained in previous posts.

Please read the posts more carefully. I was clear in addressing this point.

[pnattmbtc]

Consider this note on the word being used here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3629&t=KJV#

It may not neccesarily be translated with the correct meaning.

This is rather a cryptic comment. Strong's says the word means "kidneys."

My point is that if you are going to say that "heart" is literal, to be consistent, you should say that "kidneys" is literal as well. The word literally means "kidneys," which is how it is translated in every language literally translating (although in English the archaic "reins" which many people don't know means "kidneys").

However, although the word "kidneys" is used in the Hebrew, the concept is obviously a mental one, so that some translations translate the word "mind." Similarly the Hebrew word for "heart" is a fair amount of the time translated "mind." Other times it's translated "understanding."

Even in English the word "heart" conveys a different meaning than the word "mind," although both denote activities of the mind, such as the expressions I have given as examples, "I love you with all my heart" vs. "I love you with all my mind."

[pnattmbtc]

Me:There's also a word for "kidneys," which, like "heart" depicts mental functions. Do you wish to argue that the kidneys have "mental" functions as well? This would be consistent with your logic so far.

T:Yes to the first question, as this is the only biblical interpretation available.

Please see my note above on the kidney point.

So you're saying that the kidneys have mental functions. Ok. Well, you're consistent, I'll give you that.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Me:There's also a word for "kidneys," which, like "heart" depicts mental functions. Do you wish to argue that the kidneys have "mental" functions as well? This would be consistent with your logic so far.

T:Yes to the first question, as this is the only biblical interpretation available.

Please see my note above on the kidney point.

So you're saying that the kidneys have mental functions. Ok. Well, you're consistent, I'll give you that.