Do christians believe consciousness arises from the soul? Where do they believe the soul resides? In a particular organ of body? Beliefs of others welcome also
does the bible say where the soul is? According to many, soul & spirit are the same, and mean 'breath'
In terms of Christin mysticism the soul[some people]is earth bound and must work it's way into eternity.the spirit[some people]is already eternal and experiences physical existence buy accident which also requires reincarnation to again work it's way back into eternity.The third category not mentioned in your post are the soulless spiritless people we perceive as having an animal nature[not good or bad],just devoid.These people will return to the earth and that's it,no chance for sh*t happening to get out of it.PLEASE don't Kill the Messenger here,I'm just reporting the fac...belie...stuff I read.
The Buddha refused to answer the question where the the souls dwell, within or without.
I don't believe the soul resides in an organ. If I had to chose an organ, I guess it'd be the brain. As a Christian, I'm not sure where the soul resides, or where it goes, or how it exists. But as a person who sometimes sees a person die on occasion- I have witness the transformation when the soul is no longer residing in a human body. It's an amazing experience, and never gets old.
There is a lot of confusion regarding the word soul.
Plato's tripartite soul pertains to appetite, rational and spirited (which is really more emotional)
then there's the Jewish 5 levels of the soul, which are Nefesh, Ruach, Neshamah, Chiyah, and Yechidah, which rangers from light, to breath to blood
As for the "Christian" version is convoluted between nefesh which means literally blood, or psyche in some interpretation and the greek conception.
Where does the soul reside? Based on these definitions, well, in your head. People who say we do not have souls is saying we don't have the above.
It was a term that has come to mean essence. Where does our essence reside? Well, there are a thousand ways to answer that question.
What is this question really asking? Do we have a godself? Do we have a ghost in the machine? Do we have a non-material substance that resides in this biological machine?
Where does our essence reside? In our genes.
Do we have a godself? Define god. IF god is the aspect that creates...yes we do.
Do we have a ghost in the machine? No. The machine seems to be the ghost.
Do we have a non-material substance. Yes, We have all sorts of energy currents going around us.
Now if the real question is DID G-D MAKE US, make a new thread.
LOL! Yes, we have heads. Please show us where in the head the soul resides, exactly?
Baloney. You made that up.
And, you have just added substantially to the confusion.
Only you would be confused about something as simple as that.
Soul are aspects of the psyche and levels of functioning.
so where does the soul reside, in your head.
OR do you think the soul is your ghostly form? That's the thing, you are filled with so much casper you can't understand PLATO.
Nope. That would be the brain.
You already said that.
Yes, I understand Plato. Unfortunately, you don't understand reality.
I will never understand YOUR reality because it is unique to the 1950s.
It is truly remarkable how one can leap out of nowhere on these forums blazing ad hom fallacies with both barrels at point blank range and still manage to miss the broad side of a barn.
It is amazing that you think you have the ability to judge what a fallacy is, and also to accuse me of the very thing you are guilty of...for instance...trolling and missing the broad side of the barn.
Get a mirror and use that to see your face. It may help to remember you're no Einstein.
Yes, I can see from your post history here why you haven't the capacity to understand what a fallacy is however I would suspect you should have full knowledge as you use them so often.
You just made another one in this post.
sorry, that response fell short of expectation. low expectation.
Is there some reason why you feel compelled to keep trolling?
ceciliabeltran has far more knowledge to share than you do and is far more respected for her knowledge than you are.
Thank you for the compliment, it speaks volumes coming from you.
yes it does, got friends? Is someone coming to your defense. That speaks volumes about you.
You are most welcome , I like the way she writes and shares knowledge while I dont see any knowledge from you .I only see hahahaha not logical hahahaha not scientific hahaha
thank you mohitmisra, you are sweet but obvious things elude this man...boy...something.
True, it eludes my as to why someone would go to such great lengths to pretend.
No. 3 item in woo-woo credo. Never go past what was that "gravity".
Why would anyone pretend? why would anyone bother? It is so absurd you can tell you hope I'm pretending because there is really NO EXCUSE for your lack of understanding in modern physics. you not only do not understand philosophy, you also do not understand the work of the very man whose picture you are misusing.
What is this? Where is the soul? Where does it reside? In the overall reality, only one thing exists, all else occurs within it. The soul is all around you, inside of you. Soul is everywhere. Hi, Beel, CB. mohitmisra. Greetings and salutations from the bottom of my intangible soul!
My pleasure ,ts the truth you have knowledge to share , keep sharing I like your perspectives.
He is quite the beelzlebum, ignore his rude comments as he is unable to understand.
Human nature can be sad, laugh what one doesn't understand, what an escapist.
A person is composed of a unity of different parts, the mind, thought, emotion, personality, body, blood, organs, etc.
The Hebrew word is often translated as “soul,” implying an abstract entity contained within a person. But, the Hebrew meaning of this word is “the whole of the person” and can be understood as a “being,” “person” or “entity.” This word can be used for man (as seen in Genesis 2:7) and animals (as seen in Genesis 1:21 where it usually translated as “creature”). The root of this word, naphash means “to refresh” in restoring the whole of the person to its wholeness through rest and nutrition.
F is the sound of the P in the Hebrew word Naphash.
Since It and Arabic came from Aramaic I am sure there are a lot of words that are the same.
The soul is intangible, not a physical organ nor in a physical organ.
Just like any other non existant thing.....
I don't want to interrupt the discussion that's now going on between other posters, but I would like to ask you to maybe think about those "non-existent things"....
Is love tangible? No. Right?
Yet we believe and know that it exists.
Same with hatred and many other intangible feelings and things.
What's so different, what's so hard, about believing that souls exist?
You described emotions. We can feel emotions. They are well documented and can be altered with drugs. Love is an emotion. So is hate.
What is a soul? What does it do? How can we alter it?
Well, all I know is to search this out.
Let's see....in Matthew 26: 38, Jesus said His soul was "sorrowful" at that time....
So apparently, the soul can feel emotions.
In Mark 12: 30 Jesus said to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength. Another confirmation that the soul not only "feels", but is part of our decision-making process.
Proverbs 12: 2 says the soul of the transgressors shall eat violence (feed on violence)...
And there are many Scripture passages about the soul. Not just the definition of each person as a living soul as in counting individuals, but as each person having a living soul within them.
How is it that that intangible thing can feel and choose and etc..? What do you think?
I think that emotions while you say they are intangible, are simply chemical reactions within the body which can be controlled with drugs which is evidence that they are physical things.
Your bible quotes do nothing. If the soul does not exist (and all evidence backs this up) then the bible is simply wrong.
I would hazard a guess that you believe the bible is true? I really hope you dont think this because the bible says it is true.
It's question that has been asked ever since we have been conscious human beings; that is to say, self aware human beings, and it is a beautiful question because it is the one always asked by a child when first discussing the nature of soul. At different times in history people have thought the soul resided in the heart or the brain. Aquinas tells us that the soul is not material but an intellectual substance. The soul lives in us but does not die with us. as it is self-sufficient. When monotheistic religions teach us that we are made in God's image, they are referring to our souls that, once begotten, cannot die.
It's in the toenail.
My regular greeting is "How's ya toenails?"
G'day Kimberley! How's ya toenails love?
Man, I feel like a sucker. I know I'll get clobbered somehow for saying this but, I believe we are more than this. Call it a soul, a spirit, our energy; but whatever it is I don't think it's in the head. The one time I felt a connection it was nearer the heart, so I'll go with the heart as the seat of the soul.
And yet, the heart just pumps blood. Got anything else for a soul?
somehow I knew you would find your way here. I didn't mean to imply it was the heart. I don't know what it is. As silly as it sounds to you it is still a mystery to me. And I'm not ashamed to say it.
And, it will always remain a mystery because there are no parts of the human body that can be considered a soul. It is one of the many reasons why souls have never been shown to exist.
I would certainly never argue that souls have been proven to exist. But, who knows? I have my little mystery. You already made me throw one out. I'm still pondering this one.
If we were to rely on the laws of physics in determining whether a soul can even have the capacity to exist, we have to say no, because a soul would violate a number of those laws.
If we were to rely on biology, we would be hard pressed to find anything in the human body that even resembles what is claimed to be a soul.
We can only rely on a supernatural explaination in that if the soul does exist, it would have to do so on the same plane as gods, which is something we cannot observe or detect in any way.
So, one has to believe entirely on faith that a soul exists just like they believe a god exists.
Well, yes and no. Maybe soul isn't the proper way to define whatever it is I think. I honestly don't know. And I do agree that science doesn't offer any explanations. But it is a fact that cannot be forced from my mind simply because I cannot explain it.
There are a lot of things I don't know.
Are you sure, by your own admittance that there are a lot of things you don't know, that they are not facts you are unable to force from your mind, but instead, beliefs from a religious indoctrination long ago?
"Soul" permeates the universe. If you listen carefully, you can hear James Brown.
No. I honestly don't believe that to be the case. This is very small, but very odd and happened well after I had become an adult. I see ample reason to accept that whatever caused it can easily be explained away by other reasons than a belief in any idea of god, but it cannot be completely explained away by any means I know.
I know that sounds ridiculous and I'm sure you assume childish, but it honestly isn't. It simply happened and I have no choice but to try and understand it. I won't walk away from it simply because it appears foolish. It's a mystery. There is no simple answer.
Then, you simply put it down as "I don't know" - which is something even most scientists would consider when they see anomalies that can't be explained. Of course, those same scientists would never toss out a working theory simply because they found anomalies. Therefore, there is no need to assume the event cannot be explained.
It is also very good reason to not jump to conclusions souls exist simply because of an anomaly you can't readily explain away by any means you know.
That's fine, as long as you don't go inventing answers, like gods and souls.
Hey, no fair. I could certainly call it anything I like. But you are correct. To attribute a name that others equate with a different definition might appear as if I was offering corroborating evidence for things I don't believe in. Which leaves me at more of a loss.
I believe the soul is energy. The essense of life. Studies have been conducted at the exact time of death where they found the body weighed slightly less at the exact time of death. Science does support than nothing ever disapears it only changes form. Pictures have been made with special machienes, of plants, after a leaf has been cut off, which show the aura and energy of the leaf still there, You can see the leaf although it is no longer there. Black holes are another example of energy still existing after the mass has gone. So why is it so hard to believe we only change form,and while the shell of our body is no longer habitable our energy still exist?
That really doesn't mean anything in terms of understanding the soul, it is just philosophical gibberish.
Not that I don't take your word for those extraordinary claims which evidently appear to be studies that may show some laws of physics have been violated, as it would be something so important that would shake the very foundations of the scientific community.
Perhaps however, you refer to the weighing of tuberculosis patients by Macdougall in 1907 of which there were various outcomes, one in which the patient actually gained weight at the point of death?
And, are you also referring to Kirlian photography?
" The most famous effect of Kirlian photography occurred when a plant leaf was “photographed,” then a section was torn away and the leaf was rephotographed. A faint image of the torn-out section was still seen in the second photo. Since the same glass plates had been used, it is believed that moisture from the missing portion was providing the ghostly image. Since the glass plates used as dielectric material would tend to break down along the edges of the object, allowing easier passage of the discharge, that may also account for the effect. The observed “phantom leaf” effect was not found again in better-controlled experiments, but has continued to serve as a point of argument for the believers."
http://www.randi.org/encyclopedia/Kirli … raphy.html
The 'No Hair Theorem" shows that of the only three properties of a black hole, mass is definitely one of them.
If all I need to do is equate your misinformed and faith based claims with your latter question, the answer is evident.
I can see auras , must be insane according to you.
I have telepathic abilities, must be crazy according to you.
I can gather my chi energy, total nonsense according to you.
I go into different dimensions, way beyond your current understanding.
You really don't care about credibility, do you? You'll say absolutely anything.
Hey, I don't get mad or offended if someone does not share my opinions. LOL You were correct in regard to mass withn the black hole. I should have said collasped star instead. My thoughts came from Plato and Socrates who considered the soul "the essence of a person, incorpreal, eternal , occupant of our being". The ancient Greeks used the word alive as for ensouled. But, as you stated, there is no way to prove the existance of God or souls to another person. (Not that they don't exist) LOL. Everyone has to decide for themselves.
The photography is the Kirlian method. This was a study done at the University of California Centre for Health Sciences. They now use a high voltage camera which provides a method for converting the non-eletrical properties of an object into eletrical properties. These are converted into eletrical fields and then captured on film by means of high voltage spark discharge.
The weighing was an alleged study done by two East German Physicist who announced they had proven the existance of the soul. This was published in Horizon, a German Science journal. They weighed 200 patients immediatly before and at the time of death. They determined a soul weighs 1/3000th of an ounce. Another study was done by Dr Rowland Gunz, who weighed 300 patients using Dr. Becker Merten's method. He also determined the soul weighed 1/3000th of an ounce. Does this prove the existance of a soul, in itself? Not to me. But it does give you something to think about.
Yes, I read those articles in the Weekly World News along with other articles of interest:
"JFK meets Jackie 30 years after his assassination.
Mom vows to kill every lion on earth.
Sleep in a tub of lard and look 20 years younger.
Reincarnated killer commits identical murders, 157 years apart."
I don't think the articles you are refering to are published in medical journals.
Perhaps, but the point is they are published right alongside the articles published about souls. In other words, zero credibility.
Why would an individual decide souls exist when there is no evidence they exist? That would be the same as deciding for yourself whether or not you believe unicorns exist.
Just because there is no evidence they exist does not mean they do not. There has been much research on persons who die and are brought back who claim the soul does exist. Serious research. There are many areas in science that current technology has opened previously closed doors. During Christopher Columbus day, scientists of the day, thought the world was flat. They were wrong. They thought he was crazy to state the world was round. Who knows , maybe a unicorn will surface one day! LOL
Yes, you continue to say such things but they are not true at all.
That's called a strawman argument, which has nothing to do with the subject matter. Entirely irrelevant.
What are your credentials that you are able to state that crediable research, by doctors with established crediability, is not accurate ? Dr. Michael Sabom is a current leading cardiologist at Emory in Georgia that has done credible extensive research on the issue. He was not a beliver until he was asked to inquire of patients if they had any experiences. Most were reluctant to speak ( for fear of being thought crazy) but once they found he was serious they opened up. There is a case where the patient's body had been cooled to 60 degrees and all brain activity had ceased (dead). She was able to see what was being done to her body as well as report back to the doctor what had been done and said. How would this be possible with zero brain activity? She reported her soul had left her body. Saying it does not exist does not make it true. My point in regard to Columbus was that scientists may be proven wrong when more advanced technology and information arrives. You should not mock others beliefs or things you do not understand.
Sorry, but whatever findings about the weight of souls has never been accepted by the medical or scientific community by any stretch of the imagination. That has nothing to do with my credentials.
No, it is not credible and has not been taken seriously by the medical or scientific community. He is writing books on the subject to bilk the gullible, even though he himself is a born again Christian. He's a charlatan.
Are you just making that up? So, even though the brain is not functioning and believers consider souls to exist, how can that woman have "seen" anything if by the very act of "seeing" one must have a functioning set of eyes and a functioning brain in which to synthesize the incoming data?
If a person "sees" their soul leave their body, what is actually doing the "seeing"?
You mean kinda like you saying I am wrong does not make it true?
Yes, that is a strawman fallacy and irrelevant to the topic.
If the beliefs are ridiculous and irrational making no sense whatsoever flying in the face of reality, they should be mocked.
Well, I don't agree, but you are entitled to your opinion.
The woman's name was Pam Reynolds. I am not making this up. It was a documented case. You can view her and the doctors story on the internet. My point was the fact that she was able to see while brain dead. She was reported seeing with the soul. Common factor with NDE's. Emory has a program where they are researching this phenomena, so THEY must think it has some credibility. Patients who were born blind state they were able to see during a NDE. My point, unexplainable.
I read that case, you should read it too and read the explanations and refutations of her account. NDE's have shown to be hogwash in most cases. So what?
Again, you are going completely off topic about souls.
Science has no tools to get into the domains of eithical, moral and spiritual matters; we know about soul from the truthful Word of Revelation from the Creator-God; it cannot be denied; however there is no cumpulsion in religion; others could deny it out of their free will.
Atheism has nothing to do with science or religion; science has not been created by them and religion they don't believe; people of doubt
Typical! Swallow an elephant and strain at a gnat!
The guy is a loony born again fundy with no credibility even amongst his peers.
I think that's "strain at a gnat and swallow a CAMEL"....
Gee, earnestshub, if you're gonna critique a "fundie", at least get the reference right, wouldja?
Have you tried using "soul" more as a psychological concept to explain a part of the human condition? Works for some.
I'm pretty sure beelzedad would comment if I used it that way too.
I don't care about names and I'm not sure my mystery is confined to the human condition. Maybe I'll just call it Bob and be done with it.
Someone else said the very same thing, in just those words. Who is copying whom?
Hello Mr. curious, I saw a documentary the other day, (I forget it's title) but it was studying artistic"ness" in people.
Basically, they used magnets near the brain in order to change the brain waves within the individual.
Placing the magnets in certain areas, made people who were not at all creative, much better at art and creation.
Placing the magnets in a certain place on artistic people, made them lose their creativity almost entirely.
If your soul has anything to do with your personality, I think this study demonstrated that your personality is controlled or contained within the brain and can be affected using magnetism (disabling certain parts of the brain).
There is no evidence that the heart does anything other then pump blood.
The feeling you get in your heart (emotional feelings) can be down to blood pressure and chemical reactions in the brain affecting how the heart beats.
Sorry to be the one to clobber you
No. I was kidding about being clobbered. I've been batted around in this place enough to be used to it. It's interesting what you say about magnets. I don't know anything about magnetism and the human body, but I know I have stopped trying to wear old fashioned watches. They go haywire and someone told me it has to do with magnetism in the body. Guess the ionic current of my nervous system is.whacked. Or I've been the victim of cheap watches. Got me.
But, again, that's interesting..I'll have to see if I can find something on the subject.
Oh, but like I said it was in that general vicinity, not the heart itself. I make no claims as to what a soul might be, or where. This is simply stated from one experience. Certainly not a great deal of information. I'm sure a logical explanation will present itself one day.
Personality etc is from the brain. Drugs can completely change a person. And brain injury. And it was figured out that epilepsy was a brain disease, not demonic possession.
Originally, soul meant a living, breathing person/animal as opposed to a deceased one? Then took on other meanings?
The soul is the center of the being, that is, on an individual basis, In the larger reality, the soul is the center of creation, indistinguishable from the consciousness or the cosmic consciousness. Keep in mind that a material body is the only means by which one may enjoy physical reality.
That is deep! Time to analyze the response. lolololo. just kidding! That is a very good answer.
Let me at 'em! Don't hold me back...just let me at 'em! LOL
that's pretty much what the alchemists and taoists believe
because you're influenced by the beliefs of the church who were influenced by ancient philosophers? It was considered heresy when it was suggested that the 'soul' was in the brain not the heart, and then more heresy when there was no soul, just the brain functions
Sorry. I believe you're wrong that this is influenced by church teachings. I've read that the soul is seated deeper and that makes sense to me. The soul in the brain has a valid argument, as does the argument for near the heart. I only say what I say from one unexplainable experience. I'm sure others have more insight.
I'm considering writing a hub about it from a historical perspective.
The ancient egyptians when preparing bodies for mummification, pickled the heart (as it had the soul) and discarded the brain as a useless organ.
Plato in the 4th & 5th centuries came up with the idea that emotions are in the heart (which is still why hearts are used on valentines cards & in love songs today)
Aristotle, speculated that the heart was the seat of the rational soul, while preaching the brain was a bloodless radiator that allowed the body to cool off. (human dissections weren't allowed back then. Aristotles ideas were embraced by the church for at least 1000 years, and anything else was heresy.
Descartes separated soul & body, but spent the rest of his life on the run from the church.
Willis in the 17th century did dissections of brains and was the first to name regions of brain. He proposed the soul was in certain regions of brain.
So the idea of the soul being in the heart goes back to the ancient eygptians
Interesting stuff. It's amazing what the church feels the need to put their foot down on. Who really cares where anyone might think the soul is? It isn't as if they have any proof. Strange thing to be called a heretic for.
I'm curious because I'm researching for some hubs. It is amazing how where we get our beliefs from though. the church used to murder a lot of people for being heretics
I looked that up the other day. If I remember correctly, about 2,500 we're put to death, out of 128,000 investigated by the Spanish Inquisition; but I'm sure there were plenty others over the years.
I just finished reading a historical novel set in Europe during the plague. If any of the stuff in there about the church was true, it was horrible.
How are those valid arguments? For example, to say the soul is "seated deeper" would imply it does exist and can be found. Or, if in the brain or near the heart, the soul must have been found there. Was it?
Beelzedad be nice to me.
I was simply answering a question. She suggested that my first statement about the OP might be the result of religious indoctrination. I didn't believe it to be and set out to explain to her what I had read.
I don't intend to argue for belief in the existence of soul. I'm calling the mystery Bob now. To alleviate any confusion.
The mystery that caused me to reply to the OP in the first place, of course. What caused it? How did it happen? Why? What does it mean?
Whatnot like that. Again, it has never been my intention to extrapolate anything from the incident any more than can be done by viewing it in its simplest form. So, not to worry..I have no intention of crashing through this place with a mission to convert the heathens. I fear the christians are too set in their ways for that anyway. I assume if there is an answer to the question it will only apply to my search for truth. I doubt it will be of any consequence to anything more than my philosophy.
Please don't break this down and pick it apart point by point..I am firm in my resolve to allow this to come to what I consider to be a logical conclusion. You don't know me, so you cannot understand that this is not a simple matter of wishful thinking, or delusional thought.
Yes, those were some of my questions, as well. All you have to do is just say what happened, what did you see or hear from the beginning to the end. Easy peasy.
Hmm. It's been my experience that nothing is easy with you. I just don't know that I could explain it in terms that could make you see how outside of the bounds of the possibe it was.
I did try. I typed it several times and gave up in frustration. If I honestly thought I could do it fair justice in explaining it, I'd throw it out there for comment, but I can't. I've tried evey flippant explanation imaginable already. The only purpose served in sharing any information would be to rehash what I've already thrown out as an inadequate rationalization of the event. Man, I wish I hadn't responded to the OP.
you're entitled to respond to the OP - I'm looking at viewpoints. I might challenge them. Others will challenge my viewpoints. My viewpoints are not set in concrete.
I'm fascinated with how people come to think what they do. Many of my OP's are to see different views to take into consideration because I am considering tackling a hub on the topic
Perhaps I misworded that. I should have said something along the lines of ' Man, I wish beelzedad hadn't come into this thread to see what was going on.'
some people are more 'cut and dried'. I see both of your points of views. I'm probably somewhere in the middle. I'm a skeptic & trust my rational brain more, but I am also intuitive
That's the practical part of discussion forums, getting clarity.
You can't even put down in bullet form the things you saw or heard? Nada? Nothing?
You can call me crazy, or offer what you consider a rational explanation to be. I'd rather you do that than just post like that. It isn't like you.
Just do it. Since when did you start abiding by my wishes?
We'll have to have the conversation sooner or later, if we both keep posting on this forum. Might as well be now. And, who knows? You might surprise me with something.
Yes. I wasn't going to leave it up past the last moment I still had the chance to delete it. It's one thing to blurt out something. Another to leave it there for anyone and everyone to wander by and comment. I think I'd get irritated after a while. Besides, I figured you weren't going to answer anyway.
just_curious my friend - explaining the soul is such a mystery. you feel it and know it's validity but logic cannot define it nor can it be adequately explained.
to those who say "prove me to i have a soul". I can only give you my testimony that from my spiritual experiences a soul does exist. If you look within yourself and find the quiet spot where thoughts originate from you shall find the soul. Logic is good, but you must leave logic behind for the soul speaks its own logic beyond that of rationality.
many believe that souls or those that are lost, become ghosts that wander the last place the person was at before dying...
I have at the moment, soul in heaven and me as body on earth, with spirit a go-between.
I have soul in the 'grid', which is a grid of spheres lattice-like, which some including myself have apprehended.
There is no soul. Soul is a concept that was incorporated into Christian religion in later periods. In Biblical teachings, soul is the the combination of the body and life. When life is snubbed out, the body becomes inert. That is the end. Until Jesus resurrects the same body with the same life
Oh no, there is soul I clearly had seen my mother's soul and spirit leave her when she passed away last year. There is a soul so I do have to disagree and it wasn't my imagination it was her soul.
Sorry to hear of your loss AE, I sat with my mom when she died as well.
I hope you are doing well now. It took me a while to get past the loss of my mom.
I am doing much better, then I was from August through March. I still think about her often but I know you understand that.
I am pleased to know you are OK now, and yes I understand.
All my best to you!
AEvans, my mom has been gone for nearly eleven years now and I still have moments that are very tough to get through. You're most definitely in my thoughts. Moms are tough to lose.
if it's not too personal/painful, would you elaborate on what you saw?
The soul is unique to all of us. Some stems from the ethereal and mystical effects music -- the way it moves us. Others are feel that soul in visuals, you know? Point is, when you feel absolutely GOOD and you can't explain it and you convey it to others and they start to feel it too...? That's soul. So it can't defined...
Although, I maybe describing it in an artsy way. If you wan another definition, the soul resides in our hearts. Where do we do good and feel good... not as hypnotic as my artsy interpretation of it in my mind, but that's the plain version... anyway! God bless!
"Have you tried using "soul" more as a psychological concept to explain a part of the human condition?" I am Working on it so must be a great idea.
now there's an idea...Sorry, Motown already beat you to it. I think you just defined "Black Soul" the music which white guys have trouble doing well.
The actual physical address of the soul? 1400 Pennsylvania Avenue
Geez that's generous DD, some American's seem to reckon that is the address of something else located at the lower part of the torso.
The Soul is in the heart, to experiance life and learn. Once the body dies the Soul leaves and the heart kept as a reminder of the energy of life and immortality of the Soul itself.
The soul and spirit of man is in the Gut area. That is why you will hear some people say my brain is telling me this but my gut is telling me "this".
Feeling is not disqualified simply because it cannot be explained except for the materialists.
"Perhaps I misworded that. I should have said something along the lines of ' Man, I wish beelzedad hadn't come into this thread to see what was going on.'"
Perhaps some people see it as their mission as to save others from themselves, for the good (no doubt) of humanity.
That's how the door knocking christians think. They see it as their mission to save you from yourself for the good of humanity. Making my point that Beel is no more than someone evangelizing his beliefs and trying to convert "unbelievers" to his beliefs. Ridiculous.
"You can't even put down in bullet form the things you saw or heard? Nada? Nothing?" And I have no idea what you like like.
According to an old tv show called 'One Step Beyond', which was supposedly based on actual personal testimony, during World I thousands of soldiers saw a light in the sky and all went AWOL and walked off the battlefield. Talked to a lab technician the other day who had a similar experience.
Could you be any more vague? That's like if someone asked you where the Loch Ness resides and you answer, "In the water."
You might have missed his reason for saying that. He probably assumed it would head a question from you off at the pass. Not choosing anywhere in particular, but everywhere in general kind of makes it hard to argue. For most people.
I like to keep mine in a shoebox, labeled and kept at the back of the wardrobe. Best place for it, won't lose it there..
Does the soul reside in the body ?
Or does the body reside in the soul ?
I would say that "SOUL" is a name that has been asigned to something.
So, Yes there is a soul.
Many people asign it to differet things having different meanings.
Who I right ? Who is wrong ?
depends upon who you ask.
Yes, the soul has been assigned to an imaginary entity believed to reside inside the body. Good one, Jerami.
You assuned that I think that it rsides inside the body,
How do we know that the body doesn,t reside within a soul?
Probably, for the same reasons the body doesn't reside within a rubber ball; evidence.
VERY GOOD ANSWER must have taken much effort on your part to come up with such briliance.
Actually, considering the subject matter and the claims presented, it was very little effort at all.
I have a hundred things around the house that I need to do and a few places I gotta go, so I'll be in and out of forums today.
Be back later.
So we found the soul eh?
Funny it is so close to the religious outlet tube.
The conclusion would be that no one knows what they are talking about.
When we start trying to mix concepts like "spirit", "soul" or whatever is believed to be "immaterial" with spacial concepts which are yet but other human inventions, all doors are opened to fiction or rethorical art that leads nowhere and whose only vertue resides in the fact that it dries our mouths, giving us the best motives to have a good pint of beer.
the question "where does the soul reside" implies a material nature linked to the "soul" that contradicts it's "immaterial" nature, because we're mixing heterogeneous concepts. This world notions with far out of this world notions.
Have we seen a material object losing it's material nature when mixed with an immaterial concept thus becoming immaterial too? I'd say it is rather the immaterial object that loses it's immaterial nature when associated with a material one. (you can laugh here)
For instance :
If we say that the home of the spirite or soul is the brain or the heart, these latter don't become immaterial. It is the soul or spirit that becomes material instead. They become one same thing.
So, it's a materialist's absurd question, since materialists make no difference between "matter" and "spirit".
The one who asked this question is a materialist who hasn't noticed it yet. A materialist in his soul.. hehehe
Fortunately I'm here to inform him.
So, everyone back to their faith.
“The first man Adam became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. Nevertheless, the first is, not that which is spiritual, but that which is physical, afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is out of the earth and made of dust; the second man is out of heaven. As the one made of dust [is], so those made of dust [are] also; and as the heavenly one [is], so those who are heavenly [are] also."
1 Corinthians 15:45-47 those
Man & soul = 1. They're one and the same; the soul doesn't reside anywhere when a person dies.
Thank you Women of Courage. It's not very hard to understand. If you have a soul and you die, you cease existing that means your soul is no longer around because that's YOU.
Can someone be so kind and tell me why these forums are so difficult? Some people just love to argue and will try and send you through the ringer with little success.
I dont find these forums difficult at all. If you can back up your claims with verifiable fact, then you shouldnt have any problem at all.
I already did, I don't think you read everything I wrote. You're too consumed with anger to understand what I said.
I will NOT play your games so you're barking up the wrong tree. Have a good day.
You didnt back up anything you said to me with verifiable fact. All you did was tell me what it says in the bible.
What a liar. Your posts are worthless. Its wrong to lie. Didn't your parents teach you that?
yes thats right. If you talk to christians you have to know the lingo.
I went into the math dept and took away their prime numbers and told them their formulas didn't work. They agreed with me, but when they put their prime numbers back again, the formulas worked..
Ya can't take the bible or God out of the christian equation. Ya dont have to like it, ya don't have to agree with it, but nothing is gonna change it.
Good luck with this.
Lee, You are welcome. Some seem to make it harder than what it really is. People who loves to argue seems to be pretty miserable. I will not be sent through the ringer.
"The first man is out of the earth and made of dust; the second man is out of heaven." Thanks for the line. First man - wonder if that would mean the soul originates in dust?
yes it does.
after God breathed on it, the husk, or body, it became a living SOUL.
the soul is the husk.
This is from a jewish perspective as old as genesis.
Our idea of spirit and soul are mostly greek/roman theologies passed down over time.
Husk does not mean soul. Before you start trying to teach the Jewish beliefs you need to understand them. It takes years of fervent study. You don't understand the English bible, how can you possible understand these Jewish concepts?
Husks are also called shells. It refers to demonic forces of evil through separation of man from God.
What was united becomes separated, and the boundary between one thing and another is known as a shell.
There were no husks/shells until after the separation.
Take it from me, it's my religion.
unfortunately your definition is impossible to believe in except that a person be a kabbalist.
Humans were created from the dust, a husk if you will sculpted like an artist would a lump of clay, and then God breathed life into that husk. (this took place in the Garden before the separation) hence a living soul. The scripture is plain and that thought is carried on throughout the old testament.
what you teach is Kabbalism... a mystic religion.
Not to be connected with the bible at all.
Astrology is also denounced by God as a practice to know the future.
isa 47:13 Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up and save thee. :14 Behold they shall be as stubble and fire shall burn them.
The stars were set in place for signs and seasons not to rule peoples lives nor tell them what to do or which day is better than another. Astronomy is fine, astrology is prognostication and considered a no-no.
I see, on your profile, you are unscriptural in many areas. So as much as you like to think jewishness is your religion, which it might be that you know some stuff, but not in accordance with the bible and the way that God set up His path.
The selling of pendants to bring love and wealth is also shunned, God brings love and wealth and no other.
No Jewish person uses the term "Husk" for soul, whether Kabbalist or not.
Nowhere does the Bible say you aren't allowed to know the future. Prophets foretell the future.
I know the Jewish scriptures, and I don't want to know the incorrect English version.
The wise men were astrologers. How do you think they followed the star?
In Hebrew divination does not mean seeing the future and sorceress does not mean witch.
There are several words misunderstood.
Many times in the Torah, false practices are denounced by God. So i need not debate this point.
Sorceress in isaiah 57:3 is included with adulterers (apostasize figuratively) and whores (idolatry figuratively) in the physical sense, not Gods ways either. A sorceress practices magic, enchanter, observe times (solstice for example)
Divination 'qecem' H7081 means oracle. An oracle is someone who would tell the future for a fee, or cast lots to determine an answer to a persons question. Roll the bones if you will.
Follow cabala if you must. Dis Paul if you must.
and believe that a star stood over the place where jesus was if you must.
Again, in Hebrew, divination does not mean oracle and is not related to seeing the future.
Sorceress does not mean witch.
In the New Testament, the men of God cast lots and God gave them the answer they were looking for (not the Hebrew meaning of divination)
And as far as astrology goes, God would not create the stars and planets to use for signs and then punish people for using them for such.
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
One slight correction using the plain written scriptures of bible Genesis 2: 7-8 (NIV)
7 the Lord God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed.
God created man before he placed him in the garden..
the word put has a wide variety of connotations
try using one of them... appointed.
Now see how it reads.
I think God created man in the garden.
Saves him teleportation energies
but thats fine. I still don't see how this is a correction to anything
All versions of the bible that I have all say the same thing...Man created and then placed in garden...
You stated that the Bible says god created man in the garden and that it is plainly written as such...
I was just pointing that out was all...
If you're trying to figure out where the soul resides, you also must take into account where it does not reside. Tell me a place where there is no soul.
can you elaborate beelzedad? last time i checked we were in the universe and we possess a soul
What would make you think the universe has a soul to begin with?
i believe everything in existence has a soul. That there is something greater that permeates all that is.
So, a building or a rock has a soul? Hmmmm....
Your belief does not appear to align with reality, which does not exhibit any characteristics or properties of a soul.
to each their own. the soul is by its very nature is a personal experience. there are no experiments to prove we have a soul. i have seen and felt my own soul and cannot deny it. Its like an extension of myself just as an arm or a leg is. I cannot prove a soul exists to you, nor would i try to. it's a personal experience.
Wow you felt your soul? I felt my kablooey once. It was awesome but I cant prove it exists. Its kind of like a soul but better.
You sure you're not just taking a simple emotional feeling and attributing it to the old myth of a soul? I think you are.
like i said you're entitled to your beliefs.
but i tell you this our soul exists - it has little to do with emotions or logic.
if you ever care to just keeping asking yourself the question "who am I' and find out where the origin of the thoughts arise.
I dont have any unfounded beliefs and noone ever has any good reason to have any.
I think you need to prove that souls exist since you are asserting that they do.
As for where thoughts arise, thats easy. Its the brain. We know this from experience and medical science. Altering the brain affects peoples thought process. Head injuries can make people more or less impulsive.
Your belief in a soul is not only unfounded, but is in contradiction to verifiable fact.
Like i said I can't prove to you a soul exists. Why do i need to prove anything?? its ok if you don't believe a soul exists. In some ways a belief in a soul is saying there is a deeper level of reality/consciousness than science has proved real.
Science may prove or disprove it but there is no determinate yet. So when you say my belief is unfounded you're just closing doors to the possibility it does exist.
How on earth does me saying your belief is unfounded (not based on fact) mean that I am closed minded? That makes no sense whatsoever and I am at a loss as to how you reached that conclusion.
I am perfectly open minded thank you very much. That is why I dont place belief in things that have no evidence for them thus closing my mind to the possibility that they DONT exist.
No, it's a belief there is a deeper level of reality/consciousness.
Actually, science would prohibit the soul from existing based on the laws of physics.
No, you're just imagining and believing it does exist.
I really do wonder people. why are you so intent on proving me wrong on this idea of a soul???
Go read the biographies of the greatest men in history. Find out out the spiritual beliefs of some of humanities best and brightest.
The majority of them believed in a higher being and such esoteric invisibilities as the soul.
Listen to the testimonies of the great ones who came before and they tell you man has a soul and a higher being does exist.
Who said I was intent? I didn't.
You present nothing but fallacies to support your argument. Appeal to Authority, Appeal to Popularity, Appeal to Belief.
Why can't you just tell me where is the soul?
see your seem to think I am presenting this an argument. For it's implicit that an argument is trying to prove a point wrong or right. I am doing neither. I'm just answering your questions as to why I believe as I do.
"Where is the soul?" - you're asking me to prove/tell you an invisible metaphysical "thing". perhaps you should re-evaluate your the logic behind then line of your questioning.
Those two are one and the same.
Ah, then you haven't seen a soul yourself if it is an "invisible metaphysical thing" - hence how can you claim souls exist if you haven't seen them, or in fact, anyone?
You obviously didn't evaluate your logic before posting that.
Then, were you lying when you said souls are invisible?
Sorry, but reality dictates it's own view upon us, not the other way round.
I agree with you; the atheists non-believers are wrong here
Hey. Don't let the naysayers get you down. I think you've got a good philosophy going there. There's a lot of circumstantial evidence that there's something to the belief in a soul.
Actually, there are mountains of hard evidence for the "belief" in a soul.
I would strongly advise that you not question the crazy cat lady on this subject. It has been known to turn ugly.
Anyway, the way Jefcity describes it sounds to cool. I was just being supportive.
Yes, his fantasies sound cool, as many fantasies do.
I know. I read people's posts and they all sound great, until they make a hard left and then I can't believe I was listening in the first place. But, it's interesting. I assume if I keep reading I might find something. Or not.
That's what's cool about you. I learn something from you quite often. So it hasn't been a total waste of time so far.
For instance, Islamic propagandists rarely ever engage in discussion and instead post Islamic propaganda while denouncing other religions.
Well, the one thing I'm pretty sure he was right on his view that you might be best defined as a muslim propagandist. I am, of course, still pondering my final decision on this. But there is a lot of evidence to support that view.
I am just expressing my view point which I sincerely believe in; is search of the Truth.
"Where is the soul?" - you're asking me to prove/tell you an invisible metaphysical "thing". perhaps you should re-evaluate your the logic behind then line of your questioning.
awesome - this is why the Buddha refused to answer this question.
Now you still want an answer beezledal, earnesthub and Jesus was a hippy?
You never did as it not going to make any difference to your life as to where the souls resides.
Meditate and you will understand what the souls is and the reason the Buddha refused to answer.The only teacher is experience.
Meditation invokes feelings and possibly emotions. Feelings and emotions are evidence of feelings and emotions and nothing more. To infer that these feelings and emotions are because of a "soul" is just conjecture and since there is no evidence for such a thing there is no reason to believe it exists.
Jesus was a hippy, what the hell are you talking about emotions and feelings -meditation???
Meditation is the same as Yoga meaning yolk or union with god.
The soul merging with the super soul or god is what meditation is about.
Have you ever meditated in your life? You should because then you will have experience which equates to knowledge.
Please read about meditation since you have no idea what it is about.
Yes, an "imaginary" personal experience.
Yeah, sure you have.
No, it isn't an extension because we can see our arms and legs.
Are you taking the mick out of blind people?
just because you cannot see your soul; you doubt that others can.
Another fallacy. You just claimed that souls were 'invisible metaphysical things' so how can anyone see them?
think about this more like quantum physics. something can be two things at once. you can't understand it using the Newtonian notions
Strawman fallacy. Quantum field theory has measurable effects, souls do not.
Well the only instrument fine tuned enough to register the soul is the human body. The fastest computer in the world is right between your ears. The best network in the world is the human body. If any instrument could detect the soul it would be you, yourself. Problem here is humans can be the most full of fallacies, liars, plain out right crazy and stupid. So how do you trust anothers judgement on the soul?
Beezledad science is is limited in its knowledge, its not like science has reached the stage of omniscient.
Example chi energy of martial arts, science sees it working but isnt able to explain it at all.Science doesnt understand the martial arts as it goes beyond the grasp of science, it defies logic as we know it yet it does exist.
Science is a process and therefore cannot claim to have knowledge.
Science is a process and therefore cannot reach stages of knowledge.
I have no idea what you're talking about or how it relates to the topic.
I had a confusing experience with Chi before I was diagnosed with cancer.
I had a lump the size of a duck egg protruding from my back. My doctor who had already done 3 biopsies without finding cancer sent me to a Chinese doctor who was credible to many of the orthodox doctors despite his unusual methodology.
He gave the lump Chi and looked exhausted after 20 minutes. When he had finished he told me the lump would reduce the next day, but that he was sorry to tell me I had cancer.
He was right on both accounts and I did not believe him until the lump reduced the next day, and I got the lump removed, which was the only way to see the cancer.
This particular cancer leaves a tiny golden line which had not been seen until they sliced the material they had excavated.
Still a mystery to me, and I realize this proves nothing conclusive.
So there are things or energies or laws which exist yet science has no idea about it, they are absolutely lost where chi energy is concerned. The same way God is currently beyond science .
Martial artist often demonstrate power which goes beyond the understanding of science,its not possible according to science.
Being a twin I am sure you understand telepathy better than most, what does science say about telepathy ?
How can a human communicate half way across the world or at great distances with someone without using speech or any instrument, its impossible and illogical according to science yet its exists.
Still a mystery to me, and I realize this proves nothing conclusive.
It proves that science does not have all the answers and if you are going to believe only in science you are missing out on many truths which exist.
And thank you for sharing your experience since beezledad is lost regarding chi energy.
"Tell me a place where there is no soul."
Very perceptive. That's another way to go about it.
Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
a breathing creature, that is animal or (abstractly) vitality.
Soul is the flesh of the living person. Living on INSTINCT like an ANIMAL until Christ comes and changes that by awakening them spiritually.
We are spiritually dead until christ comes into our life by salvation.
man havng a spirit is not correct unless you allow the word spirit to be defined as an attitude. For instance the spirit of the world has changed. That man has an angry spirit. Team spirit is alive and well!
Humans have no personal spirit until christ puts his spirit in us. They are just living creatures or living souls.
It has been proven that body and brain cells contain memory. The flesh you walk around in is the (new age term) CD of your life.
Pure nonsense. Show us your evidence that the body contains memory?
when you throw a baseball for example.
my belief would be that we are living souls...... The reference to the scripture above, saved me looking it up...
an old soul = an old person. an expression we use a lot.
We are living souls..... Nothing inside is floats of to heaven when we die, especially the soul, it is not seperate from us, we are souls.
That is what i was taught.
We can control and destroy our body only not soul.
JESUS told the theif that you will be with me in paradise today at the time of crucification.
With out body and blood both are in paradise.
After some days the soul of jesus return back with GOD permission to body and came out from the tomb and went away from us.Bible says that he will come back.
GOD can only destroy the soul and body.
now that scripture you quote.
Jesus said, i tell you today, you will be with me in paradise.
The comma after today, changes the concept. They were not going to paradise today..... he was talking to him today.......
i noticed the same thing about the comma placement and i agree the comma is out of place because leaving the comma where it is says they are going to paradise today... but wasn't jesus buried in the grave? That doesn't sound like paradise to me. Jesus didn't go to heaven either, this we know because he spent time on earth before ascending. the jewish teaching is that man goes nowhere after he dies but to the grave which is literally, "back to God" since God is everywhere.
I referred the BIBLE .
In LUKE - jesus said that I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.
pl check your Bible soon if any printing mistake .Very serious one.
where does the soul reside?
Soul resides in the body; it gets springs up very naturally in a child while in the womb of a mother by commandment of the Creator-God Allah YHWH; it leaves the body temporarily while one is asleep and permanantly when one dies.
[39:43] Allah takes away the souls of human beings at the time of their death; and during their sleep of those also that are not yet dead. And then He retains those against which He has decreed death, and sends back the others till an appointed term. In that surely are Signs for a people who reflect.
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … p;verse=42
Human beings believed in the Creator-God very naturally and peacefully; though some times some frustrated individual did differ on certain things which were not correct; that is always welcome as freedom of will and freedom of choice.
As the time passed humans deveoped and evolved many kowledges, philosphy, maths and science but at that time no "atheists" worth the name were there.
When the scientific method was evolved; the eulogizers of science; non-believers in the name of "Atheism" sprung up and started confontration with the believers.
Confrontation started with the atheists; they believe in chaos and disorder; not in a system.
With the first example above, the claim of believing in "the Creator-God" is entirely focused on one particular religion, while at the same time the author submits it is "Human beings", implying all humans believed in the same "Creator-God".
While the author does in fact use the word "confrontation" correctly here, it is not being used consistently in following the claims and the argument.
Confrontation can be defined as "A bold challenge; a focused comparison; bringing together for a careful comparison" which would be consistent with the argument that science and the scientific method allowed people to understand the world around them, which coincidentally put into question many religious beliefs about the world around them, hence the "bold challenge" towards believers to conciliate their beliefs with scientific findings.
Other definitions include "Discord resulting from a clash of ideas or opinions" which has been observed as the result of believers defending their faith when confronted with bold challenges and reconciliation.
And of course, there is no mention of the 'discord resulting from a clash of ideas or opinions' during the centuries prior to the existence of the scientific method and 'confrontations' with atheists.
Rather than being a conclusion drawn based on the intended latter definition of 'confrontation' we find instead a statement of exasperation, frustration and sheer desperation of the "disorder and chaos" of a belief system crumbling under the guidelines of the former definition.
finding out what you've believed all your life is a myth is very confronting
Remember, myth is not a lie, nor is it the whole truth.
Myth is the abstract presentation of what is perceived as truth based on the story told and how that story is interpreted. AKA a literal-expressive. Complete truth is void of myth and dismissal, because all myth & dismissal is subjective --be it in literary form or hand-me-down story telling.
Myths are codes for knowledge that is spoken in pure chemical-sensory language.
Unfold the code and you'll get the truth.
So is it the full truth? My question is, if you and I come from a singularity, would we be talking? No. There would be no need for talk. The answer came with the question. No causality. The end of my nose will be indistinguishable from your left pinky. It will be as if the nose is a pinky until it is unfolded by (Binah) logic and NAMED--James'pinky, Cecilia's nose end.
Myth mixes up pinkies and noses all the time because they are folded information, like a long long narrative of the experience that span hours forced into a phrase..."the moon lives in the lining of her skin"
"and G-d said, "Let there be light". They are crunched up because they are stored in a tiny place called our heads.
"pinky & nose" -what a team we'd make!
Precisely! This has been my resonance from the start! "It is not necessary to consider a question nor its result, an answer. Both are relative parallels within the "Need To Know" syndication. That syn is the brain attempting to 'sort' the infinite collective strands of organic energy. To unravel the 'mystery' of something that does not need to be unraveled (nor wants to be unraveled ?) --it just wants to be revealed.
Like trying to unwrap and sort the particles of sunlight, the myth is used for cohesion (Scotch Tape) so the human does not go "pop" as that revealing is happening. At least that's my take on it. The illuminating power of the human spirit, the massivity and "pitch" of frequencies alone, needs to be filtered, through the mind so it can be experienced in the body, without "interference".
Myth is the transition, the poetry --like you said: "the moon lives in the lining of her skin"..."Let There Be Light".
pinky and nose is right about appropriate...(can't seem to get rid of the annoying bugger)
That it is not necessary to decode it is absolutely right because it reveals itself at the time it is most relevant.
when life begins to get poetic, you know you are already get how it all weaves around a core desire that runs all your operating systems. That core desire, that's you.
Which can't you get rid of, the pinky or the nose?
the pinky and the nose is a team up to get rid of that annoying B!
Isn't that poetic, right there, how B just fit right into that statement without me planning it? I do believe in fairies, I do, I do!
Have you seen the Peter Pan with Jeremy Sumpter, circa 2003. If you haven't, watch it. It was loaded!
First, I am disheartened slightly by the direct question to "Christians", as many others regard a portion of the human as "soul". To be more precise, nearly 90% of all 'spiritually' based expressions, often interchanged with the mind or an altogether different portion (deemed spirit) with the soul. In my experience the soul is the apparitions of the mind --meaning the imagination. The spirit of the human being often unites with the mind, not the brain, expressing the organic connectivity humans once enjoyed. To belittle that portion of the human nature is to reject or dismiss the very fabric of their 'genetics'.
Our beliefs, outside of a spiritual mode, that we are born, we live, we die, and thats it, is contradictory to what we know about physics. The definition of consciousness, exactly what it is, eludes us. As long as this is so, then the question of the soul and the reality of something beyond this plane of existence must remain open. We have no absolute answer, but, if we keep looking, we'll find it.
It seems as though many many peoples first belief is that of containment.
Everything has to be contained within something which has to be contained within something else ???? NOT.
Or is it? Maybe it is true ? Maybe everything is contained or limited within something else?
But if everything is relative ?
Is anything realy contained or limited within ????
The soul IS greater than the sum of its parts.
OR ... is the soul ONLY a small part of who we (as an individual) IS ?
OR ... Do we as individuals, collectively make up the soul which is greater than the sum of its parts?
And the soul as we preceive it (as our own) is but the Tip oF the iceburg?
We can find no such part.
And yet, no such thing has been found, individually as parts or a whole. Nada. Nothing. Zilch.
Hmmm. If we followed that line of reasoning we wouldn't have cause to search for the answers to anything. Doesn't all research begin with a hypothesis? Some think a soul exists, therefore they search for answers by spiritual means. Lack of proof is what fuels the search. It's a working hypothesis.
If we followed your line of reasoning, scientists would spend much of their time searching for leprechauns and unicorns, and every other imaginative myth one can conjure.
However, that is not the case, is it?
Science has already discovered a number of laws to the universe and already understands that the supernatural claims made by believers violate those laws.
Hence, it is up to the believer to present their evidence showing how their supernatural claims not only are real but how they do not violate those laws.
Actually, it begins with an observation. What is the observation of souls?
No, it is not a working hypothesis, by definition. It is an unfounded belief, by definition.
Not to sound like a pirate, but Argh. That's silly. No one would expect science to attempt to study something there is no physical proof of. I would, however, be highly suspicious if they didn't jump into the fray at the point where someone could offer some.
Agreed. However, science is well aware of the fact that there are still many questions that need to be answered before we know everything.
I might disagree with that statement, to an extent. I believe the concept of the atom was proposed quite a long time before we had the means to search for proof of the concept.
Midwives knew, hundreds of years before our ability to explain, that simple hand washing lowered infant mortality rate; while doctors scoffed at the suggestion.
I know, you'll say this was the result of observation; but the concept of the soul falls into the same observable category for some. Maybe not others. Just as these examples did.
I say it is a working hypothesis. Just as many other observations were, that were well beyond our ability to investigate when they were first proposed.
Every scientist who endeavors to answer questions and understand the world around them would wholeheartedly agree with you. However, it is the offering of such evidence that is the central problem.
Yes, but that is a strawman fallacy. Answers to questions regarding observations and hard evidence are far removed from the process and understanding of answering theological questions, hence cannot be compared.
As well, the unanswered questions of the former are not likely to have answers associated with the latter.
And, if the claims of believers in the supernatural are so abundant and forthcoming amongst the billions who make them, we would have at the very least managed to capture something along the way as far as an observation or some evidence.
Again, another strawman fallacy. Atoms were proposed to explain observations and hard evidence, an effect that could be measured.
You can't make that a comparison to the invisible and undetectable concept of a soul.
Strawman fallacy. What does this have to do with anything?
You have not explained what exactly is "observable" or defined any kind of categories.
Have a good look at the definition of a 'working hypothesis' and how it used in the scientific method to see why it can't be.
Then, how pray tell, can souls be known to exist if they are well beyond our ability to investigate?
What exactly was observed in order to make a proposal in the first place?
I've never been a fan of the strawman fallacy term. Sounds Wizard of Oddish.
What observations led to the proposition of the existence of the atom in 400 BC. ? Sure, it wasn't anything like what we know, but you say they observed something. Why did it take over a thousand years for others to observe the same thing and go in search of it?
Midwives? They saw something the doctors did not. Why did it take hundreds of years for their observations to be observed by others?
I realize these are physical things and the concept of spirit is spiritual. But the same thing applies. Some have perceived something that others have not. As with the above examples, it would certainly follow that, if proven, it would apply to all; whether they see it or not.
People see a little something and they spruce it up with imagination. That's human nature. But it does not negate the fact that something may be there.
As to working hypothesis. I'm using this definition; a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument. As with all things, its simply a matter of how you choose to see it. Simply because you do not use the same definition does not mean this one won't function within a sentence.
And I did not mean to imply that souls are known to exist. They aren't. Hence the wording of the OP. Where do you think they reside.
Allow me to introduce you to this website and all the links contained therein:
Whenever you write a post and make any claims, refer to that website to see if your claims are valid and that your arguments are credible. After a short while, you will learn those fallacies and no longer use them in your posts. This will greatly increase the valid content and credible claims you present.
They didn't take a thousand years to go searching for it, they simply needed to know what to look for and then develop the technology to observe the cause of the effect.
Let's also not forget the church's support of the sciences in the past thousand years, also.
Where did you get that one about midwives? My understanding is that Semmelweis came up with handwashing.
No, it would not apply. It would have to be shown to exist. Period. What others claim to perceive is entirely irrelevant. Check the fallacy page for that one.
But, it in no way suggests something is there, either. Fallacy.
As opposed to how reality does or does not exhibit it?
In ones imagination.
I will certainly review the website further. But, I don't concede that I am using faulty reasoning. I'm pretty sure that's not the case on this one. You simply choose to draw a line that might be further south than it needs to be. Or, you may be right. Who knows. I would have to tread crazy ground to find an argument to continue so: I bow to your superior argumentative skills only.
But, thanks for being so civil about the disagreement. That's apparently not in fashion today on some of these threads.
"Fallacious" reasoning, which leads to faulty claims and conclusions.
Hmmm. I think I paid you a compliment. This is the thanks I get? *heavy heavy sigh*
What is fallacious about my reasoning? We disagree on a very tiny point. Well, that's the way I see it anyway. So, let's revisit your post.
I have no idea what that has to do with the conversation. The only assertions I believe on this subject are well removed from christianity. It has to do with spirit and consciousness. Not heaven or hell.
Well, of course Semmelweis came up with it. I didn't say the midwives did. What I said came from an article I read. I don't remember its source so, never mind. We'll throw that one out.
The rest are only fallacies because, as I previouisly stated, you choose for them to be. You draw a line that others chose not to. It is your line, not mine.
No, it is because they are themselves logical fallacies.
For example, the Strawman is where you create another version of the topic and find reasons to support or refute it, and whether you use it to support or refute that version, it does nothing to support or refute the original topic.
Beelzedad. Beelzedad. Your tenacity is unparalleled. I admire that. Don't agree with you, but I'll call the spade a spade.
Logical or not. Reasonable or not. Rational or not. There are some things that cannot be explained or explained away. That's life.
Where's a head shaking in disagreement emoticon when you need one. That's what I want to know.
How do you know for sure Beelzedad? What evidence do you have that you are right, and so many others across so many years and across the face of the earth must be wrong? I don't begrudge you your stand. I understand it completely. It's only logical. I do wish I could agree with you.
But, I will say, if you ever have cause to doubt your stand, I am almost 150% sure religion's take on the whole topic is bogus.
I would refer you to the Appeal to Popularity fallacy from that list.
You are free to disagree with me, that is fine. But, if your disagreement is based on fallacious reasoning leading to false conclusions, how will you ever know if your disagreement is valid?
Is our big toe aware that it is but a small part of a greater entity than itself?
Can it prove the existence or non existence of a thing greater than the sum of its parts?
Are we individually little more (in comparison)than a molecule contained within a big toe.
How can that molecule prove or disprove the existence of the moon?
We precieve ourselves to be much more than we realy are don't you think?
Are you serious? Is that some kind of joke?
Your examples are ridiculously childish, Jerami.
You may be correct OR it may be that you refuse to see simplicity..
I know what your comeback to this is going to be.
Good hunting. I am sure you will bag your limit.
The problem is that you offer only simplicity.
Jesus said,unless you become as a child,you will never understand the Kingdom of God.
I would agree. The success rate of working towards and possessing the mind of a child is a measurable effect we can observe here daily.
It`s sad dad, but you`ll never get it. Completely over your head. Best wishes.
Regressing back to the mind of child is over my head?
Whew! That's a relief.
Sad that we have opposing beliefs.You seem to actually have a sense of humor.
Actually, it's sad that you only possess beliefs.
Beel? He's not so bad. He's sensitive, but so many are, these days. SOT57 is trying to express the sentiment that one can't experience the wonder of Xmas if one is convinced that Santa doesn't exist.
It means to drop all your ego, become inquisitive like a child again. Right now your ego is your biggest obstacle.
Are you implying one cannot be inquisitive unless one has the mind of a child?
That is entirely not true.
A cat is inquisitive. This is not a human thing alone. What that is saying is that you can't be restrained by disbelief. If you have a single doubt which is allowed to crstallize, then, you just simply can't conceive of it. You must view it with the eyes of a child.
So, rather than honing ones skills of astute observation with critical thinking and coupling it with ample knowledge and understanding of the world around us, your suggestion would be to regress back to an immature, short attention spanned, irrational mindset with little or no understanding?
The child doesn't have any foolish ego, like I already know the answer.
This develops with time ,ego.
No then you will become humble enough to see the intelligence of this universe.
seems as though inteligance belongs to the universe and SOmetimes a little of it falls down upon some of Yawl.
Being humble has nothing to do with observing and understanding the universe.
Truth is not foolish ego but when you dont know something and behave like you do then its called foolish ego.
how can we come close to truth if a whole lot of intelectual bla bla bla is not based upon simple truth.
Don't let yourself be discouraged by intellectual tortuous bowels.
Truth should be simple enough.
Isn't it true that heaven is the realm of the simple minded ?
So there is consolation for a lot amongst us.
Yesterday, we've celebrated death.
Tomorrow, we'll celebrate resurrection.
Ain't that simple ?
Back in the early 60s my philosophy professor in his first session with us asked us to write about the soul - did it exist, what was it, and was it eternal, if it did exist?
Naturally the answers that we all came up with were wildly varying - a lot like this discussion here. And most of what has been written here came up then too.
The OP asked about what Christians believe. I'm not qualified to answer for Christians but would like to put my ha'porth in.
To believe in a soul is to take a dualistic view of the world - that there is soul and a separate body. A concept given philosophic currency by Plato.
Personally I think (not believe) that what we call "soul" is the totality of who we are as a person, and therefore when we die, that's it, the soul no longer exists because we no longer exist. The soul is not a separate entity, it is what we are, a physical body with a consciousness (which itself is a troublesome concept) which arises out of the electrical impulses and connections made in the neurons of the brain and the rest of the body. When these cease, that individual consciousness ceases. End of story!
Descartes said the seat of the soul was the pineal gland. No more fanciful than some of the answers I have seen here and read elsewhere.
One who created the sould tells us that the soul is not enternal as it is His creation. It resides in the human body; temporaily the soul goes out of the human body when we are sleep and when we die it returns to Him permanantly:
[17:86] And they ask thee concerning the soul. Say, ‘The soul is by the command of my Lord; and of the knowledge thereof you have been given but a little.’
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … p;verse=85
[39:43] Allah takes away the souls of human beings at the time of their death; and during their sleep of those also that are not yet dead. And then He retains those against which He has decreed death, and sends back the others till an appointed term. In that surely are Signs for a people who reflect.
The pineal gland is also referred to as the third eye.Concentration on it allows one to see the light.
My philosophy has always been - to find the soul or spirit, you look for evidence of communication in the external world.
Not sure if anyone has stated this already, too many posts to read through and I need to cook tea.
I see nothing in the bible or scientific research to suggest that man is anything more than flesh and blood. It would appear that the soul consists of the mind, and therefore the bio-chemical-electro processes that go on in the brain. To see your soul at work, all you need to do is stick your head in an MRI scanner, then watch the pretty colourful pictures on screen.
Maybe one can only experience what one knows to look for.
I'm curious on what the general consensuses has been here. Does anyone know?
Geeze the spammers are early this weekend. nailed these two.
The soul is a spiritual phenomenon, it cannot be seen with the naked eyes. The soul resides in the rift between the spirit and the body of man, it serves as the intermediary between the body and the spirit. It manifest itself in our imagination especially during personal meditation.
by Sooner285 years ago
Theists often times have trouble defending God against gratuitous evil, such as a person burning to death slowly with no clear reason the suffering has to be so severe. In any event, there is another problem that...
by Elijah75 years ago
This question, ONCE properly answered and understood, will FOREVER change your opinions regarding the Time Honoured Subject of LIFE AFTER DEATH.The challenge is for YOU to PROVE you have NO soul, no spirit, and...
by Roshan Sharma3 years ago
> Mystery lies within You.> Explore the Mystery, by handling the situations of life.> Bring awareness to the Actions of life.> Plan your Schedule in Advance> Add Different techniques to your Schedule. (...
by Carolyn4 years ago
I feel that believing in one religion is not practical. Likewise, there is no way of knowing if there is one God, or any God for that matter. I'm not saying there's not either, though I do trust science it only goes so...
by Dave Barnett7 years ago
Some people here in the forums have discussed the existence of God, stating that they have seen no proof, while others have proclaimed there is proof all around. If you do not search your heart, mind and soul, then no...
by SparklingJewel7 years ago
The Wall Street Journal asked to famous authors, Karen Armstrong and Richard Dawkins, to respond to this question. Here are their independent answers.These are short articles, to the...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.