Tell me more ×
Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professors, theologians, and those interested in exegetical analysis of biblical texts. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 0 down vote favorite

Why the human brain is never mentioned in the Bible?

Has this matter ever been discussed by the scholars of the biblical texts? I mean, people knew about the existence of the human brain even in the times of Job - just like they also knew about the existence of all other physical human organs of the human body, and a lot of human organs are mentioned in the Bible, except for the brain. Why is it so?

share|improve this question
2  
Love the Lord your God with all your heart, and all your mind. Not all organs are mentioned in scripture, and remember, many cultures thought the spirit resided in the gut, not the head. – Affable Geek Sep 4 '12 at 17:39
2  
If the Bible is true, it should have given us Relativity, super-luminal travel, the map of the galaxy, reason why my toe itches for 15 seconds b4 I sleep, etc. – Blessed Geek Sep 5 '12 at 6:09
3  
@BlessedGeek, there is a difference between "true" and "all truth". Who says the bible ever promised to reveal every single truth? – Monica Cellio Sep 5 '12 at 12:07
It was reverse-sarcasm. – Blessed Geek Sep 5 '12 at 14:30
1  
for the purposes of clarification I'd like to ask whether or not you're seeking a theology of the human (anthropology) as it relates to "mind", "body", "spirit", "soul", etc. or are you seeking a biblical historical understanding of human constitution. meaning - if "thought" was so important, why didn't the ancients address the organ that we now know to be the center of "thought?" – swasheck Sep 6 '12 at 0:12
show 7 more comments

closed as off topic by swasheck, Dan O'Day, Monica Cellio, Soldarnal, Jon Ericson♦ Apr 17 at 19:44

Questions on Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange are expected to relate to the analysis of biblical text within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

3 Answers

up vote 1 down vote accepted

Although there is a link between our thoughts and emotions to our brains, I think the Bible assumes the brain was part of the flesh and not really the seat of the mind, emotions or will. It is not interested in medical science but spiritual history of the kingdom of God.

I do not think of the brain as being the mind, emotions, or will. I think of it as the connector with the soul, so the soul can control the body. The soul is outside the brain and imposes its mind and will on the brain in a two-way push-pull relationship. For example, when a disembodied soul goes to paradise with Christ, they still have mind, emotions and will but no brain. The do not need a brain because they do not need to interact with the physical world. Therefore, although the Bible does not engage in neuroscience, it speaks beyond the flesh.

The mystery of how the soul affects the flesh and the flesh affects the soul is not explained in the Bible. However the Bible does admit the physical has mutual interaction with the spiritual. Neuroscience only more clearly sees this working from the physical side, and the Bible reveals the relationship from the Spiritual side.

The brain is not the soul, even our current body and brain, not like our future one. Our future body will need a different brain, if it has one, to react in a different physical world:

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. (NIV 1 Corinthians 15:45)

Notice that Adam had a brain but until his soul was breathed into him he was not a living being.

The body is just a shell and only when it is animated by the soul is their proof of a living life. Actually this was a common definition of Aristotle, if I remember correctly, as determining, ‘What is living?’ The answer was the animation of the object, whether plant, vegetable or animal.

Is death not defined by the soul leaving the body?

Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last. (NIV Luke 23:46)

Notice it would seem strange of Jesus had said ‘Father I commend my brain into your hands, as he was just about to leave his body, with brain, in a tomb.’

share|improve this answer
But why would it have been strange? You're looking at this anachronistically. The reality is that the ancients had zero conception of the brain, as evidenced by the Egyptians' discarding of the brain and preserving of the heart during mummification. – swasheck Sep 5 '12 at 13:59
@Swasheck - Weird because he was committing his brain to the earth. Jesus promised the thief they would be together that same day. Jesus discarded his brain for only three days, but the theif discarded it for a few thousand years. How can we confuse the spiritual with material I can never comprehend, or entertain. – Mike Sep 5 '12 at 15:13
"How can we confuse the spiritual with material I can never comprehend, or entertain." That's not the question. The question is why the Bible never mentions the "brain." You're confusing modern science and medicine with ANE science and medicine. – swasheck Sep 5 '12 at 15:17
@swasheck - I don't think the OP meant this as a scientific history question. More of a religious question. Liken 'If the brain is so important why did Adam (who probably was more intelligent before the fall)  not tell his children about it?' or 'Why did God not mention dinosaurs?' Typical answer: not important. You seem to be taking the question more literally, like 'why does the Bible not mention electric currents or magnetism? – Mike Sep 5 '12 at 23:52
1  
I disagree. I take the question as what it is. Regardless, your answer still reads present knowledge into ancient texts. You also attempt to develop a theological anthropology based on this question which borders on the debate of the nature of the human as dichotomous vs. trichotomous. I see no justification for your accusation of confusion between spiritual and material - I was simply directing you to the reality that your answer (as with most of your answers) are decent theological responses but that there is a basic logical error in its formulation as a response to this question. – swasheck Sep 6 '12 at 0:09
show 1 more comment
up vote 8 down vote

Until somewhat recently, people didn't know the purpose of the brain. Aristotle proposed, quite reasonably, that the brain was a sort of radiator for the blood. We now know that the brain is the seat of not only the mind, but emotions as well. The state of the art in anatomy during Biblical times postulated that emotions came from the bowels. We still speak of the heart as the place where our desires, will, and feeling emanate from. So the brain was not a particularly noteworthy member of the body.

But the mind is mentioned constantly in the Bible. In fact the mind plays a critical role in what many hold is the most important commandment in the Scriptures:

And one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, “Which commandment is the most important of all?” Jesus answered, “The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” And the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher. You have truly said that he is one, and there is no other besides him. And to love him with all the heart and with all the understanding and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.”—Mark 12:28-33 (ESV)

Notice that Jesus (and Deuteronomy 6:4-5 where Jesus quoted the first commandment from) divides the person into three parts:

  1. Heart,
  2. Soul, and

  3. Might

    But Jesus adds:

  4. Mind

The addition probably was intended to clarify that whole person is commanded to love God and not just some parts and not others. Metaphysics of the time proposed several distinct divisions of the inner person, including the mind. In Moses' culture, a person was understood in simpler terms.

Conclusion

Advancements in neuroscience now lead us to associate nearly every aspect of the inner person with the brain, rather than other parts of the body. Therefore, the Bible is actually speaking of the brain quite often, but mistakenly associates emotions, will, mind, etc. with other organs instead.

share|improve this answer
1  
This is the better of the available answers – swasheck Sep 5 '12 at 14:11
up vote 7 down vote

The ancient Hebrews believed the heart to be the locus of thought and the bowels to be the locus of emotion (well, at least the emotion of mercy and compassion).

For example, if you were to translate the English phrase "He thought to himself" into Hebrew (both classical and modern), you would say, אָמַר בְּלִבֹּו (amar belibbo)" which means "He said in his heart."

Furthermore, in Hebrew, the word רַחַם (racham) means "bowel" as well as "mercy" or "compassion."

Simply put, the ancients didn't have the understanding of the human anatomy as we do today.

share|improve this answer
2  
Welcome to Biblical Hermeneutics! It seems strange to us, but then again, it probably would seem strange to imagine that the inert grey matter in our skulls would be the locus of humanity's active thought. – Jon Ericson♦ Nov 14 '12 at 0:12
1  
How about this one? Pharoah's heart is a liver! (Exo. 7:14). =) – H3br3wHamm3r81 Nov 14 '12 at 1:03
I thought רַחַם was womb? (If so, that conveys a different sense than bowel does.) – Monica Cellio Nov 14 '12 at 1:49
There are two similar words: רַחַם and רֶחֶם. I would cite Genesis 43:30 as an example that רַחַם does not mean a womb (something only a female can have). However, there are certainly other scriptures that seem to imply that meaning. On the other hand, I would affirm that רֶחֶם does indeed mean the "womb." It appears the most common word for "intestine(s)/ bowel(s)" is קֶרֶב. Monica, what do you think רַחַם means when used of a male subject? – H3br3wHamm3r81 Nov 14 '12 at 6:54

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.