Heart - a faculty of the mind?

[Guest]

yes, the bible is a spiritual book.

the faster we learn that we dont have a clue what God is like or what He is trying to teach us, the faster He is able to start teaching us.

if we decide we understand the words on the page, God will never be able to teach us anything.

So you are saying we cannot understand the Word of God? He has not left us clueless, and in the dark.

The reason that many professed Christians do not have a clear, well-defined experience, is that they do not think it is their privilege to understand what God has spoken through his word. {CE 87}

Many think that they must consult commentaries on the Scriptures in order to understand the meaning of the word of God, {CE 85}

...it is our duty earnestly to search the sacred word, that we may know what is truth, and be able intelligently to present it to others. {CE 197}

In order to do the will of God, we must search His word, that we may know His doctrine, {CSW 73}

we shall be enabled, under the guiding of the Holy Spirit, more fully to understand the lessons of God's Word. {CG 46.2}

Then we shall rightly understand the teaching of God's word, and esteem the truth as the most valuable treasure with which to store the mind. {CE 82}

We need individually to seek the Lord until we find Him, and then to follow on to know the beauty of His character. Christ invites His believing people...{LLM 212}

[Guest]

if we knew their studies touching on this very issue, well it would not be an issue. we would know. the same is in regard to being ignorant of the issues involved in kelloggs pantheism.

that is what im discovering anyway.

I know full well what pantheism is, and I could be wrong but I believe Mark may have a touch of it in his theology. I know sky did. If I am wrong Mark, I apologize.

[Woody]

It does seem to me that this discussion is dangerously close to pantheism.

[Guest]

No it's not.

[Woody]

Yes it is.

[Guest]

no it isn't.

[Woody]

How petty.

[Guest]

I agree

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

Richard:I know full well what pantheism is, and I could be wrong but I believe Mark may have a touch of it in his theology.

Quote:

Woody:It does seem to me that this discussion is dangerously close to pantheism.

Quote:

Richard:No it's not.

Woody was agreeing with you, and then you disagreed with him, thus effectively disagreeing with yourself!

[Guest]

You missed what was really going on. Look at the header above each post.

[Woody]

Quote:

Woody was agreeing with you, and then you disagreed with him, thus effectively disagreeing with yourself!

This is quite typical for our friend Richard ... pnatt. I just thought nothing of it. I think he just likes a good argument. And if he can't find someone to argue with ... he argues with himself.

[Guest]

Do not.

[pnattmbtc]

That reminds me of a story. My grandfather, on my father's side, said something provocative about politics or something to my Mom to get an argument going, but my Mom wasn't biting. So he kept talking, eventually taking the other side of the question, to see if that would work.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

yes, the bible is a spiritual book.

the faster we learn that we dont have a clue what God is like or what He is trying to teach us, the faster He is able to start teaching us.

if we decide we understand the words on the page, God will never be able to teach us anything.

So you are saying we cannot understand the Word of God? He has not left us clueless, and in the dark.

[teresaq]

I know full well what pantheism is, and I could be wrong but I believe Mark may have a touch of it in his theology. I know sky did. If I am wrong Mark, I apologize.

[Guest]

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

if we knew their studies touching on this very issue, well it would not be an issue. we would know. the same is in regard to being ignorant of the issues involved in kelloggs pantheism.

that is what im discovering anyway.

I know full well what pantheism is, and I could be wrong but I believe Mark may have a touch of it in his theology. I know sky did. If I am wrong Mark, I apologize.

You are indeed wrong Brother...

No pantheism here.

Some think saying:

1Cr 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

Is pantheism...

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Quote:

So you are saying that "mind" equates to "thought".

No.

Quote:

And "heart" equates to emotions/desires.

No.

Quote:

Is that correct Pnat, do you agree with that differentiation?

No. As I pointed out, these are very rich concepts, about which many books have been written. To pigeon-hole them as questioned above would not do these concepts justice. However, I would say that often when the word "mind" is used, the cognitive qualities are what is being regarded, whereas when "heart" is used, it's often regarding the emotions/affections/desires/motives, etc.

However, "mind," for example, can be all-encompassing, involving what is in some circumstances covered by the concept of "heart." For example, "Mind refers to the aspects of intellect and consciousness manifested as combinations of thought, perception, memory, emotion, will and imagination" (from wiki).

So you are saying you do not want to define them, but then criticise my definitions?

Come on brother. :-)

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Again, you are coming back to the point that the Holy Spirit dwelling in us is a non-literal event.

No, this isn't correct. The event is literal. That is, that the Holy Spirit dwells in us is a literal event. The same thing can be said in regards to Christ. That is, that Christ dwells in our heart is a literal event. However, the heart is not the physical heart, and Christ doesn't dwell physically in us, as He physically dwells in heaven.

Quote:

Ignoring the plain statements of scripture:

No! Mark, to interpret something differently than you do does not imply "ignoring" it. Have you not noticed that you are the only one holding to your point of view? So everyone else, who understand "heart" to not be the physical muscle is "ignoring" Scripture? This doesn't seem to be an unreasonable assertion to you? Why not assert something more reasonable, like this isn't how you understand the Scriptures.

Quote:

2Ti 1:14 That good thing which was committed unto thee keep by the Holy Ghost which dwelleth in us.

Jhn 14:17 [Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

Rom 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

So I ask you this question pnat:

1Cr 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

Here's the definition of "temple."

Quote:

a building for religious practice.

So, taking this literally, I assert we are literally buildings for religious practice, and if you disagree with me, you are ignoring the plain statements of Scripture.

I think you need some new paint.

You have not addressed the point:

1Cr 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

So what does it mean by temple brother?

Maybe it means my house?

Maybe it means my car?

Maybe it means my cat?

Mark :-)

[Twilight]

Quote:

yes, the bible is a spiritual book.

the faster we learn that we dont have a clue what God is like or what He is trying to teach us, the faster He is able to start teaching us.

This is a good point.

The teachings of Jesus come to mind. Often what He said was not understood for the reasons you're pointing out. In speaking of the Kingdom of God, He asked the question, "To what should I compare it," and the SOP brings out that He couldn't think of anything; it's unlike anything of this world. Yet so many understand it, and Scripture, as if it were.

Interesting...

The only comprehension that is true comprehension is that which the indwelling Spirit opens up to our minds...

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

Sure, but proof comes from the Bible and SOP, not the pioneers. I guess you haven't read much Ellen White have you?

are you implying they came to their own conclusions apart from the scriptures and much prayer?

if we knew their studies and reasoning we would not have drifted so far...

Quote:

God has given me light regarding our periodicals. What is it?--He has said that the dead are to speak. How?--Their works shall follow them. We are to repeat the words of the pioneers in our work, who knew what it cost to search for the truth as for hidden treasure, and who labored to lay the foundation of our work. They moved forward step by step under the influence of the Spirit of God. One by one these pioneers are passing away. The word given me is, Let that which these men have written in the past be reproduced. {CW 28.1} [/quote']once we start reading them we will have much less interest in what is being produced today, except as it equals the spirit of those who suffered to produce this church.

if we knew their studies touching on this very issue, well it would not be an issue. we would know. the same is in regard to being ignorant of the issues involved in kelloggs pantheism.

that is what im discovering anyway.

A vast majority of the pioneers rejected the 1888 message.

Some later went on to become pantheists.

Are those the pioneers you are referring to?

Mark

[pnattmbtc]

You have not addressed the point:

1Cr 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

So what does it mean by temple brother?

Maybe it means my house?

Maybe it means my car?

Maybe it means my cat?

Mark :-)

I addressed the point, or, rather, made the point, stating that if you take it literally, the way you do "heart," it means "a religious building."

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

You have not addressed the point:

1Cr 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

So what does it mean by temple brother?

Maybe it means my house?

Maybe it means my car?

Maybe it means my cat?

Mark :-)

I addressed the point, or, rather, made the point, stating that if you take it literally, the way you do "heart," it means "a religious building."

But brother, what do YOU think it means?

You are telling me I am wrong, but not stating why?

For you to state this position is incorrect, you have to establish your own.

Otherwise it is a judgement without reasoning and is therefore not really relevant as a discussion point, but more as an expressed opinion.

Mark :-)

[pnattmbtc]

But brother, what do YOU think it means?

You are telling me I am wrong, but not stating why?

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

But brother, what do YOU think it means?

You are telling me I am wrong, but not stating why?

I wasn't making any comment about what you thought about "temple." This was just an example to illustrate a point, which was that if you're going to take "heart" literally, then, by the same logic, you could take "temple" literally. I'm assuming you don't think we're literally religious buildings.

Quote:

For you to state this position is incorrect, you have to establish your own.

I made no such statement.

Quote:

Otherwise it is a judgement without reasoning and is therefore not really relevant as a discussion point, but more as an expressed opinion.

It was just an example.

Can you please answer the question my friend?

What do you think the "temple" is, if not the body?

Mark :-)