Did Jesus hold false beliefs?

[Kaon]

Here is an article on "Answers in Genesis":
Did Jesus Hold False Beliefs? William Lane Craig Suggests So!

In Matthew 13:15 and John 12:40, Jesus is quoting Isaiah talking about "understanding with their hearts".

Did Jesus know that hearts can't understand things and that it is the head (or mind) that understands things?

If so, did he just let people wrongly believe that their hearts could understand things because he didn't want to confuse them?

You may be basing comparison on human knowledge (or academia), which (even in its most advanced application) is painfully makeshift and unsophisticated at best.

The Word of God actually ordered the matter, quantum vacuums, and inter-dimensional spaces around it - everything - so if He says we think with out hearts, then He knows better than the latest Laureate physician.

On the other hand,academics are just beginning to realize the connection between the heart and brain (this was know for a while, but it wasn't "officially" known until academia legitimized it). Your brain controls impulses and connections, but your heart provides the vector for which the chemistry of your body can distribute properly. When you are excited/hate/love/like/dislike/judge/etc, it is your heart that distributes the chemical consequences of your endocrine system. Your brain (mind) allows your body to react to produce the endocrine push in the first place.

Your heart and brain are both "minds". One is electromagnetic (spiritual/brain), the other is mechanical (physical/heart). They represent two sides of the same coin of will, and action.

 

[Kaon]

Liver causing anger is because of the bilious matter that gets secreted, which can disrupt the chemistry of the blood stream and ultimately cause neurological responses that mimic what one would call anger.

It is just about an insufficient nutrient base, a non-homeostatic environment or a combination of natural and spiritual activity.


Incidentally, it is also related to mysticism - since the liver is in a location thought to be part of the system that controls such behavior.

 

[JohnClay]

....Ok, so this is some opinion of a writer in the Jewish Encyclopedia.

Surely they'd be an authority on what they say about "Biblical writers". What you are saying is an opinion. BTW in university Wikipedia doesn't count as a valid source but the Jewish Encyclopedia would. If you can't accept what that source says that what would you accept? Note it is "The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia".

I can't see the full context of the statement, so I don't know what else was there.

You can click on the links:
HEART - JewishEncyclopedia.com
LIVER - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Out of context, it appears that what you are quoting might be interpreted as physical heart and liver.

Yes

Nevertheless, the first statement appears more that it is acknowledging "heart" in a metaphorical sense.

No:

"The three special functions, knowing, feeling, and willing, ascribed by modern psychologists to the mind, were attributed to the heart by the Biblical writers"

It is saying that unlike modern psychologists, which attribute those things to the mind, the Biblical writers involved the heart.

When I do a search in that encyclopedia on "heart" it yields this statement: "Biblical Data: The seat of the emotional and intellectual life." This tells me that the same Encyclopedia acknowledges the metaphorical nature of the term in a Biblical context.

I can see no evidence that they thought the brain was involved though.

...But in Lam. 2:11, it is obvious to me the term is used metaphorically.

How can you be sure that the authors didn't think the liver could literally be troubled? Just because modern science conflicts with that idea, it doesn't prove the author knew that.

So whether or not the Biblical writers knew human anatomy is not the issue, nor does it put them in the category of ignoramuses. The context of words in scripture determine the usage of the words, so the context determines whether we should interpret those words as literal or figurative. This is how to properly discern the original meaning.

If it is always figurative then the question is what they thought was literally the case. I've provided evidence about what the authors literally thought and you haven't.

So the mind is located closer to the head than the heart is, and this is the reason why you don't think that "heart" in scripture is being used metaphorically? It looks to me like you are straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

In additional in HEART - JewishEncyclopedia.com there is also what Aristotle and Egyptians, etc, believed. I could find more. You have provided no hard evidence that they knew the head was involved. You just don't want to admit the authors were ignorant/incorrect.

I would like to see an authoritative reference for this statement that you are quoting, unless you are merely quoting your own opinion.

See:
HEART - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Note since it is an encyclopedia it would be pretty authoritative - and it is Jewish.

I do not agree with this statement. The way I read scripture is that when the context demands a metaphorical meaning of words, I take it as metaphorical, and furthermore take it that the writers understood and intended a metaphorical usage.

If they never talked about the head, how was this truth handed down? Did they secretly tell each other about the head's function? And this means they are more knowledgeable than Aristotle.

.....Since your post #23 was to someone else, I was not aware of what you were referring to. But now that I see it, all 16 of your examples are modern expressions, so the Biblical writers would not have used any of those expressions.

Implying they had no belief that the head was used for those things.

But in regard to the metaphorical usage of the term "head," note this one:
Psa 38:4 "For mine iniquities are gone over mine head: as an heavy burden they are too heavy for me." This is clearly a figurative usage of the term, meaning guilty thoughts and feelings.

So then no evidence that head was literally used for thoughts.

Which I disagree with your interpretation of that evidence.

Then find some hard evidence rather than your unsupported insistence that the authors were more knowledgeable than Aristotle, etc, in this area.

Because the NIV is not a word-for-word translation. It is a thought-for-thought translation, so in places like Lam. 2:11 where the figurative language appears awkward in modern English, they simply translate the meaning of the statement in modern language, which eliminates the awkwardness of the actual Hebrew verbage.

The liver is figurative from our educated point of view. It doesn't prove the authors were also as educated.

The expression could be taken as both literal and figurative....

ok

 

[JohnClay]

You may be basing comparison on human knowledge (or academia), which (even in its most advanced application) is painfully makeshift and unsophisticated at best.

The Word of God actually ordered the matter, quantum vacuums, and inter-dimensional spaces around it - everything - so if He says we think with out hearts, then He knows better than the latest Laureate physician.

On the other hand,academics are just beginning to realize the connection between the heart and brain (this was know for a while, but it wasn't "officially" known until academia legitimized it). Your brain controls impulses and connections, but your heart provides the vector for which the chemistry of your body can distribute properly. When you are excited/hate/love/like/dislike/judge/etc, it is your heart that distributes the chemical consequences of your endocrine system. Your brain (mind) allows your body to react to produce the endocrine push in the first place.

Your heart and brain are both "minds". One is electromagnetic (spiritual/brain), the other is mechanical (physical/heart). They represent two sides of the same coin of will, and action.

Ok you've justified your answer - you're saying the heart somehow literally understands things.

 

[tdidymas]

Surely they'd be an authority on what they say about "Biblical writers". What you are saying is an opinion. BTW in university Wikipedia doesn't count as a valid source but the Jewish Encyclopedia would. If you can't accept what that source says that what would you accept? Note it is "The unedited full-text of the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia".


You can click on the links:
HEART - JewishEncyclopedia.com
LIVER - JewishEncyclopedia.com


Yes


No:

"The three special functions, knowing, feeling, and willing, ascribed by modern psychologists to the mind, were attributed to the heart by the Biblical writers"

It is saying that unlike modern psychologists, which attribute those things to the mind, the Biblical writers involved the heart.


I can see no evidence that they thought the brain was involved though.


How can you be sure that the authors didn't think the liver could literally be troubled? Just because modern science conflicts with that idea, it doesn't prove the author knew that.


If it is always figurative then the question is what they thought was literally the case. I've provided evidence about what the authors literally thought and you haven't.


In additional in HEART - JewishEncyclopedia.com there is also what Aristotle and Egyptians, etc, believed. I could find more. You have provided no hard evidence that they knew the head was involved. You just don't want to admit the authors were ignorant/incorrect.


See:
HEART - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Note since it is an encyclopedia it would be pretty authoritative - and it is Jewish.


If they never talked about the head, how was this truth handed down? Did they secretly tell each other about the head's function? And this means they are more knowledgeable than Aristotle.


Implying they had no belief that the head was used for those things.


So then no evidence that head was literally used for thoughts.


Then find some hard evidence rather than your unsupported insistence that the authors were more knowledgeable than Aristotle, etc, in this area.


The liver is figurative from our educated point of view. It doesn't prove the authors were also as educated.


ok

I just think you are nitpicking by straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. Even the Jewish Encyclopedia you quote says these things under "heart":
"The seat of the emotional and intellectual life." - obviously "intellectual" means the brain is involved.
"Leb is used figuratively for the center or innermost part of objects other than the human body" - then the Biblical writers knowingly used the term figuratively for other things as well, then I conclude that their usage of the body part is also figurative.

Therefore the Biblical usage is not about the body part and its location and its physics, but rather about a person's life and soul. This is figurative by nature. I just think your idea that it is about the physical body part is your interpretation of everything you are reading.
TD

 

[Kaon]

Ok you've justified your answer - you're saying the heart somehow literally understands things.

Yes; it thinks in the same way allegedly brainless, hive-minded ants make the individual decision to be a part of the hive, providing individual labor to do individual work to benefit the hive.

Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest. Proverbs 6:6-8
​

It is also an electromagnet (albeit, a very weak one). The heart beats with a frequency pushing organic iron molecules through a circuit. Hence, the biofield or bioelectromagnetic field every human produces.

We are just now beginning to understand how magnificently built our bodies are. But, this magnificence is old; the prophets/ancients and non-Hebrew ancients knew this in the world ago.

 

[JohnClay]

I just think you are nitpicking by straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. Even the Jewish Encyclopedia you quote says these things under "heart":
"The seat of the emotional and intellectual life." - obviously "intellectual" means the brain is involved.

The first sentence in the heart article is "the seat of the emotional and intellectual life". Today we know that that the brain is involved and you haven't provided ANY evidence that that is what the Bible's authors thought. In a similar way we know the earth goes around the sun but that doesn't prove the Bible's authors also thought that. So please provide at least one Bible verse that says the head/brain is involved with thoughts (compared to the hundreds of Bible verses about the heart) or a web page.

"Leb is used figuratively for the center or innermost part of objects other than the human body" - then the Biblical writers knowingly used the term figuratively for other things as well, then I conclude that their usage of the body part is also figurative.

It is saying that heart is used figuratively sometimes, not always. Also note what I put in bold.

Therefore the Biblical usage is not about the body part and its location and its physics, but rather about a person's life and soul. This is figurative by nature. I just think your idea that it is about the physical body part is your interpretation of everything you are reading.
TD

You have provided no evidence that the Bible's authors thought the brain was involved.

 

[tdidymas]

The first sentence in the heart article is "the seat of the emotional and intellectual life". Today we know that that the brain is involved and you haven't provided ANY evidence that that is what the Bible's authors thought. In a similar way we know the earth goes around the sun but that doesn't prove the Bible's authors also thought that. So please provide at least one Bible verse that says the head/brain is involved with thoughts (compared to the hundreds of Bible verses about the heart) or a web page.


It is saying that heart is used figuratively sometimes, not always. Also note what I put in bold.


You have provided no evidence that the Bible's authors thought the brain was involved.

The fact that the meaning "mind" is used in both words for "heart" and "head" shows that the authors knew the whole man is involved in thoughts and feelings.
Ecc 2:14 "The wise man's eyes are in his head, but the fool walks in darkness." It is obvious that this whole statement is figurative, and that "head" contains the wisdom (thoughts) of the wise man, who "sees" with "eyes" of wisdom.
Jer. 3:16 "The ark of the covenant of the LORD: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it." "Mind" here is Heb. leb which is heart.
Jer 17:10 "I, the LORD, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give to each man according to his ways, According to the results of his deeds." "Mind" = kilyah (kidneys).
So then, the whole body, that is the whole man, is used to indicate thoughts and feelings. Head, heart, kidneys, liver, bowels, etc. It is all figurative, and various body parts are likely used to indicate various types of thoughts and feelings, as to where those particular feelings may be located.

So then, do you claim that Ecc. 2:14 is not figurative?
TD

 

[JohnClay]

.....Ecc 2:14 "The wise man's eyes are in his head, but the fool walks in darkness." It is obvious that this whole statement is figurative, and that "head" contains the wisdom (thoughts) of the wise man, who "sees" with "eyes" of wisdom.

The NIV says "...The wise have eyes in their heads...". I think it is just saying they have eyes (i.e. they aren't blind/ignorant) and their eyes are located in their heads. I don't think this is saying the author knew that thoughts come from people's heads/brains.

Jer. 3:16 "The ark of the covenant of the LORD: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it." "Mind" here is Heb. leb which is heart.
Jer 17:10 "I, the LORD, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give to each man according to his ways, According to the results of his deeds." "Mind" = kilyah (kidneys).

So the authors thought the mind was in the heart or kidneys...

So then, the whole body, that is the whole man, is used to indicate thoughts and feelings. Head, heart, kidneys, liver, bowels, etc. It is all figurative, and various body parts are likely used to indicate various types of thoughts and feelings, as to where those particular feelings may be located.

If it is all figurative then there must be a place that is literal. Unless you're saying that the authors thought that there was no place in the body that thoughts came from. Or did they think thoughts basically came from everywhere in the body? Or they had no opinion at all?

So then, do you claim that Ecc. 2:14 is not figurative?
TD

"The wise have eyes in their heads" means that they can "see" or know things rather than being ignorant. That is figurative.

 

[tdidymas]

The NIV says "...The wise have eyes in their heads...". I think it is just saying they have eyes (i.e. they aren't blind/ignorant) and their eyes are located in their heads. I don't think this is saying the author knew that thoughts come from people's heads/brains.


So the authors thought the mind was in the heart or kidneys...


If it is all figurative then there must be a place that is literal. Unless you're saying that the authors thought that there was no place in the body that thoughts came from. Or did they think thoughts basically came from everywhere in the body? Or they had no opinion at all?


"The wise have eyes in their heads" means that they can "see" or know things rather than being ignorant. That is figurative.

I'm done debating about speculating what the authors may or may not have believed. It is completely irrelevant. Since God wrote the scripture, I believe what it says and have no doubts as to the truth it contains. The prophets were "carried along" by the Holy Spirit, and that makes what they wrote the word of God, and not their own private interpretations. And since Jesus was and is "the Word of God," He had no false beliefs.
TD

 

[Lukaris]

Maybe there is something embedded in our cerebral circulation? An interrelation stemming from the blood but expressed in the mind?

Leviticus 17:10-14
Acts of the Apostles 15:28-29

Cerebral circulation - Wikipedia

Heart and Brain Health


Matthew 15:18-19

 

[Uber Genius]

Here is an article on "Answers in Genesis":
Did Jesus Hold False Beliefs? William Lane Craig Suggests So!

In Matthew 13:15 and John 12:40, Jesus is quoting Isaiah talking about "understanding with their hearts".

Did Jesus know that hearts can't understand things and that it is the head (or mind) that understands things?

If so, did he just let people wrongly believe that their hearts could understand things because he didn't want to confuse them?

Firstly, stop reading the propaganda of Answers in Genesis. They have many decades of distorting the facts around science and abusing the scriptures by reading modern science back into Genesis.

So better to hold false beliefs than knowingly spread them!

Secondly the article falsely accuses Craig of not studying The book of Genesis due to him saying “I can’t decide what to make of the Babel and Noah accounts.”

Craig has taught Genesis online since 2007!!!

He reviews 7 Bible-inerrancy theories about Gen 1 alone!

So Craig says openly that he is not sure which inference best explained the data.

Answers in Genesis is attacking a strawman!

Now to your question we need to go to the Chalcedonian Creed and see that it affirms Christ has two complete natures, one divine and one human.

The human nature explains how Jesus was able to be tempted, became hungry, tired, and didn’t know the time of the second coming. He also grew in wisdom! So his omniscience was masked and unavailable to Jesus conscious state anyways. It would seem that Jesus would have no understanding of the theory of quantum mechanics or the answer to the grand unified theory, string theory etc.

So I don’t see any reason to believe he didn’t hold false beliefs.

But this doesn’t mean that the beliefs he has recorded in scripture are false. It could be the case that God superintended the process of recording and compiling Jesus’ statements so as to exclude false beliefs.

So jesus’ Human nature doesn’t preclude God’s getting his will accomplished in any way.

 

[chilehed]

Did Jesus know that hearts can't understand things and that it is the head (or mind) that understands things?

Did whoever asked that question know anything about the English language?

 

[John 1720]

Here is an article on "Answers in Genesis":
Did Jesus Hold False Beliefs? William Lane Craig Suggests So!

In Matthew 13:15 and John 12:40, Jesus is quoting Isaiah talking about "understanding with their hearts".

Did Jesus know that hearts can't understand things and that it is the head (or mind) that understands things?

If so, did he just let people wrongly believe that their hearts could understand things because he didn't want to confuse them?

Hi John,
Well, I guess no one will ever accuse you of being a person who one wears his heart upon their sleeve. However, I don't think distancing oneself from the real meaning of the Lord's metaphor will ever make the heart go stronger either. Anyway, kidding aside, the point is Jesus did not misunderstand human anatomy but was speaking of the heart as the central part of our being as a spiritual analogy. Certainly His meaning has not been lost on the great poets of the last two millennia who absolutely get what He was speaking about. Are we really exploring Christianity here?
In Christ
John 17:20

 

[Hishandmaiden]

I think when Jesus said understand by heart, it means that we need to pay important attention to the thing we need to understand by heart.

 

[VCR-2000]

if jesus said that hearts can understand things, then hearts can understand things, although i think both 'heart' and 'mind' used in scripture did not necessarily refer to the physical 'heart' or physical 'head'.

i don't think god would go along with an inaccuracy because people weren't smart enough to get it right by themselves. look at jesus' comments to the saducees on resurrection, and marriage in heaven.

Are you saying you are yet another person I have come across that believes marriage (or an equivalent type of relationship at all) doesn't exist as a thing in Heaven? What are you saying?

 

[ldonjohn]

Hey JohnClay, Jesus is God, and no, He did not teach false beliefs. If you want to learn something about Jesus that can change your life then read WESTOZZE'S post; post#5.
John

 

[Phil.Stein]

Are you saying you are yet another person I have come across that believes marriage (or an equivalent type of relationship at all) doesn't exist as a thing in Heaven? What are you saying?

That's what scripture says, isn't it? The marriage is between the Lamb and His bride, the Church.

 

[VCR-2000]

Then our "marriage" here is a metaphor I guess.

My other point is that I think being told I won't be able to experience some kind of equivalent intimacy with another person of the opposite gender in Heaven comes off as only judgemental and makes Heaven sound not as "exciting".

If we can discuss things more, let's PM.