What is your opinion of Jesus?

[Ajax]

Actually, I have known quite a few religious Jews who don't believe in any sort of afterlife at all. I'm not saying all Jews. Obviously our opinions vary.

I wasn't aware of that...

 

[Trailblazer]

I have not studied what other religions say about soul, but I think all believe in some version of a “self”, variously named, which survives death.

According to the Baha'i Faith the soul is the self, the person we are in life that survives death.
Our physical body is not our person, it is only a vehicle that allows the soul to function.

Yes, you are right, there are things which can be invisible, immaterial, and unproven, but they can be observed by various means whilst others have been extensively studied and supported by empirical evidence,. The soul can not be observed neither be supported by any evidence.

That is true. The soul cannot be observed or supported by any evidence.

Would you care to explain the soul with valid arguments? Also why it is not useless with regard to it's contribution to the human body?

I cannot argue for the soul. I can only tell you what I believe about the soul.
The soul is not useless to the human body since it is the soul that animates the human body, allowing it to function.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Unless someone thinks they're immune to gravity.

That someone would have to take that on faith. And all the evidence would say the opposite.
And when taken to the test, that person's faith will prove to be misplaced.

IOW: that person will be wrong. Demonstrably so.

After all, we're taught now that we can do anything at all if we think we can. No judging!

No idea what you are talking about here.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If men can become women and become pregnant, and even identify as 6 years old when they're 50, and society must accept it or be labeled as a hater,

Ow sure, let's inject some political and cultural bigotry into this.

then why couldn't Jesus have risen from the dead if there were thousands of eyewitnesses saw him and interacted with Him after first seeing him killed?

Transsexuality aren't claims of magic, so your analogy fails.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How do you decide what's true and what isn't from the same source?

Verifiable evidence independent from the source.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Already done.
Still waiting for anyone wishing to refute what the Bible says to prove their POV.

Blatant shift of the burden of proof.

 

[Sargonski]

According to the Baha'i Faith the soul is the self, the person we are in life that survives death.
Our physical body is not our person, it is only a vehicle that allows the soul to function.

That is true. The soul cannot be observed or supported by any evidence.

I cannot argue for the soul. I can only tell you what I believe about the soul.
The soul is not useless to the human body since it is the soul that animates the human body, allowing it to function.

Interesting perspective - When do you figure the soul enters the fleshy abode during pregnancy ? That which the soul will "animate" - not sure about the allow to function part .. is a better way to word this .. get what you are trying to say though.

I argue for 22 weeks -- the reason which I think is a wee bit of "evidence for the soul"

When the body dies the soul goes back to "Heaven" -- which is - can be - like a way station between vacations. In heaven there are millions of channels to watch on TV -- many different reality TV shows for the trillions of planets .. in this universe and the other .. and so you can see what these places are like prior to vacationing there .. you can also adjust the timeline --- kind of like rewinding a movie back .. so if you wanted to take a vacation on Earth for example .. you could choose the time period .. and for a few extra credits even choose the location where the soul will be re-spawned .. re-united with a fleshy abode.

You go to the vacation place .. they tell you to lie down and give you the Blue Pill .. you fall asleep and when you wake up .. you are on vacation.. .. the one rule about vacations is you will not remember your previous lives .. The "I AM" moment will happen in the womb ..

Now .. the question here is .. at what point during the formation of the fleshy abode does the soul arrive ? .. I propose 22 weeks as prior to this the flesh can not capacitate the Soul .. the wiring not complete .. there can be no "I think therefore I AM" moment until the wiring of the brain is in place.

Once this happens .. the brain lights up like a xmas Tree ---- like you turned the key .. flipped the switch and the engine started and is now humming .. The soul has arrived .. and the flesh has the ability to capacitate self awareness.

 

[Ajax]

The soul is not useless to the human body since it is the soul that animates the human body, allowing it to function.

We are all entitled to our own beliefs my friend.
However hundreds of scientific experiments have shown that the human body is animated by a complex network of biological and physiological processes that work together to create life, growth, and movement. The nervous system, circulatory system, and respiratory system through the central control center which is the brain, are the main essential factors that help to keep the body animated and functioning at its best.

 

[Dimi95]

I will explain it to you...
Christianity teaches that the soul has memory, so each person can defend itself during Judgement day. It also claims that the soul enters the body upon conception.
So if the above two dogmas are correct, you should be able, using your soul's memory, to describe us in full detail, what you saw and feel in your mother's womb for 9 months and tell us all your memories from the first 2-3 years of your life.
You can not though because these two Christian dogmas are false. All the memories are stored in our brain and at the first years of our lives (let alone as embryo) our brain isn't fully developed. Which means that when we die and our brain becomes worm food, we won't be able neither to have memories, nor to feel anything.

We don't know what happens with consciousness after we die.
From a strictly scientific viewpoint, we don’t know. There is certainly no verifiable, repeatable evidence that the consciousness continues to exist. Nor is there any particular scientific reason to believe it does. Then again, science does not consider an absence of evidence to be evidence of absence.

The unkown is untestable , so one thing is certain: if our consciousness continues to exist after we die, we’ll all get to know, eventually.

I will have more time next week , we should continue with the Gospels

 

[Ajax]

We don't know what happens with consciousness after we die.

We do know though what happens to consciousness when someone is anesthetized for a surgical operation.
We also know that loss of consciousness happens when people have various medical problems like disorders of the nervous system, severe anemia that can result in decreased oxygen delivery to the brain leading to fainting, irregular heartbeats, heart valve disorders, injuries or simply knocking our head and more. We can safely assume therefore that the brain controls consciousness and when the brain stops working when people die, there is no consciousness.
As simple as that.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

There's a big difference in the promises given by a car salesman, and those given by the creator of the universe.

But you don't have that. The promises you have come from men claiming to speak for a creator god, who can't know any more about gods or afterlives that any of the rest of us. Yet they speak as if they do, and many people believe them.

As I said, your belief is not evidence there is no soul.

Belief that a soul exists is not evidence that the believer is correct. Without evidence, such a belief is merely a guess. Critical thinkers need sufficient evidence to believe. It immunizes one against accepting false beliefs.

There is no contradiction at all.

Sure there is, but the zealous believer will not permit himself to say so. It's not important that they do. It's something that any disinterested reader can see for himself. And there are many other contradictions in scripture that he likely also cannot see. Those that can understand what that implies about scripture and use that knowledge.

how is it that one is not solely responsible for their own self-destruction when they reject life with God

The one responsible would be the god that never showed itself and expected people to ignore reason and guess that it exists if it does and insist on being believed in and will destroy the skeptic. That's not the description of a god I can respect. It's also not the description of a person I would respect, like a girlfriend who, though not expressing her wishes, gets angry that her beau didn't divine what she wanted for her birthday and bought something else.

The argument that once one has been told something he is responsible for not believing it despite an absence of supporting evidence is rejected. The Muslims say the same about non-Muslims - you have been told about Allah, and if you have not believed that absent supporting evidence, you deserve punishment. A critical thinker rejects both claims for the same reason. They're just what somebody claimed and nothing more.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

I see good and I see evil everywhere but I want to believe in love and for me that's believing in Jesus. We all die but they say the devil is the master manipulator, so where do people get lieing and killing instincts from I say there's a god of evil the devil and love comes from Jesus you want proof?

No, not proof, I want good evidence that convinces me.

Well look at your surroundings and ask yourself how hate and love began where did the exsistance of love hate and lies come from. Or we were just born to hate and judge because anyone who doesn't believe in Jesus hates or judges

There is no good evidence that love and hate come from anywhere except human minds. I know people that believe in Jesus and judge and hate others.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Perhaps then you can describe your memories as an embryo and as 1-2 years old person from the backup in your soul. What? No?
Seriously though, memories cannot be passed down genetically. The idea that memories or traits can be passed down from one generation to another through DNA or genetics is known as Lamarckian inheritance, but this idea has been discredited by modern science. Amnesia is a deficit in memory caused by brain damage or brain diseases. Probably the only information that can be stored in a child up to 1-2 years old is the face of the mother/father, due to the repeated exposure to them and even that takes some time. Around 5–6 years of age is thought to be when autobiographical memory seems to stabilize and be on par with adults.
How does the brain store memories?

You are talking only about the explicit (or declarative) memory. BTW I can actually recall one autobiographical event from a time when I was 1-2 years old...

I'm not talking about what is passed from generation to generation at all, but how life experience affects DNA and body.

Early life experience can persistently alter expression levels of key genes through epigenetic marking which can underpin changes in behavior, neuroendocrine, and stress responsivity throughout later life. Collectively, this process is referred to as epigenetic programming.

Epigenetics of Early Child Development

Comprehensive clinical studies show that adverse conditions in early life can severely impact the developing brain and increase vulnerability to mood disorders later in life. During early postnatal life the brain exhibits high plasticity which allows ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The epigenome can be affected by positive experiences, such as supportive relationships and opportunities for learning, or negative influences, such as environmental toxins or stressful life circumstances, which leave a unique epigenetic “signature” on the genes.

What is Epigenetics? The Answer to the Nature vs. Nurture Debate

Scientific research shows that experiences can affect whether and how genes are expressed. Nature vs. Nurture is no longer a debate—it's nearly always both!

developingchild.harvard.edu

 

[Trailblazer]

Interesting perspective - When do you figure the soul enters the fleshy abode during pregnancy ? That which the soul will "animate" - not sure about the allow to function part .. is a better way to word this .. get what you are trying to say though.

I argue for 22 weeks -- the reason which I think is a wee bit of "evidence for the soul"

According to my beliefs the soul is the person, but the soul associates itself with the body before we are a viable person:

Each individual life begins when the soul associates itself with the embryo at the time of conception. But the association is not material; the soul does not enter or leave the body and does not occupy physical space. Bahá’u’lláh uses the metaphor of the sun to explain the relationship between the soul and the body: “The soul of man is the sun by which his body is illumined, and from which it draweth its sustenance, and should be so regarded.”[4]

The Bahá’í writings explain that such faculties of the mind as thought, reasoning, understanding and imagination are “inherent properties of the soul, even as the radiation of light is the essential property of the sun.”[5] The body of a man is “like unto a mirror, his soul is as the sun, and his mental faculties even as the rays that emanate from that source of light.”[6]

The Rational Soul | The Human Soul | The Life of the Spirit | What Bahá’ís Believe

The website of the worldwide Bahá’í community

www.bahai.org

When the body dies the soul goes back to "Heaven" -- which is - can be - like a way station between vacations. In heaven there are millions of channels to watch on TV -- many different reality TV shows for the trillions of planets .. in this universe and the other .. and so you can see what these places are like prior to vacationing there .. you can also adjust the timeline --- kind of like rewinding a movie back .. so if you wanted to take a vacation on Earth for example .. you could choose the time period .. and for a few extra credits even choose the location where the soul will be re-spawned .. re-united with a fleshy abode.

Those are not my beliefs about Heaven. I believe that Heaven is a purely spiritual world so there isn't anything physical in heaven.
I believe that we will have spiritual bodies in Heaven, not physical bodies.

“The answer to the third question is this, that in the other world the human reality doth not assume a physical form, rather doth it take on a heavenly form, made up of elements of that heavenly realm.” Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 194

“The nature of the soul after death can never be described, nor is it meet and permissible to reveal its whole character to the eyes of men. The Prophets and Messengers of God have been sent down for the sole purpose of guiding mankind to the straight Path of Truth. The purpose underlying Their revelation hath been to educate all men, that they may, at the hour of death, ascend, in the utmost purity and sanctity and with absolute detachment, to the throne of the Most High.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 156-157

 

[Trailblazer]

hundreds of scientific experiments have shown that the human body is animated by a complex network of biological and physiological processes that work together to create life, growth, and movement. The nervous system, circulatory system, and respiratory system through the central control center which is the brain, are the main essential factors that help to keep the body animated and functioning at its best.

I believe that is all true, but that does not exclude the possibility that the soul is associated with the human mind, which is what I believe.

 

[Trailblazer]

Belief that a soul exists is not evidence that the believer is correct. Without evidence, such a belief is merely a guess.

It is not a guess. It is a faith-based belief.

 

[Sargonski]

According to my beliefs the soul is the person, but the soul associates itself with the body before we are a viable person:

Each individual life begins when the soul associates itself with the embryo at the time of conception. But the association is not material; the soul does not enter or leave the body and does not occupy physical space. Bahá’u’lláh uses the metaphor of the sun to explain the relationship between the soul and the body:

Those are not my beliefs about Heaven. I believe that Heaven is a purely spiritual world so there isn't anything physical in heaven.
I believe that we will have spiritual bodies in Heaven, not physical bodies.



“

Wee agree that soul associates itself with fleshy abode at some point.. what you have not done is explain where, why, when and how that association takes place as I described .. nor responded to that description except with negation , - , which is fine but not unsupported negation ?

Why is this association at conception ? you give no rational, explanation of any kind supporting or showing that this claim is true.

You say "not my beliefs about heaven" then repeat what I stated .. soul not associated with physical in heaven?! ..

So OK agree the soul is not associated with the physical in heaven -- The disagreement is on when the soul links back up with the fleshy abode. You claim conception .. giving no support .. I say .. by your definition of soul .. that which actuates the flesh -- the zygote can not capacitate that actualization .. can not make that thought happen .. the thought to make finger twitch.

By my definition of soul .. which is in line with your claim of actualization -- the "I AM" moment .. the moment the entity becomes aware of its own existence .. is when the entity is actualized and now combined with the soul.

Prior to around 22 weeks .. there is no ability of the soul to be actualized .. no ability of the flesh to capacitate "I AM" "I am Here" "Is there anybody out there" .... !! There is no word .. there is no will .. there are no thoughts .. there is no pill .. U Understand ?

 

[Trailblazer]

Why is this association at conception ? you give no rational, explanation of any kind supporting or showing that this claim is true.

That is a religious belief, not a claim, thus it is not subject to proof. Catholics also believe that the soul begins at the moment of conception.

By my definition of soul .. which is in line with your claim of actualization -- the "I AM" moment .. the moment the entity becomes aware of its own existence .. is when the entity is actualized and now combined with the soul.

Prior to around 22 weeks .. there is no ability of the soul to be actualized .. no ability of the flesh to capacitate "I AM" "I am Here" "Is there anybody out there" .... !! There is no word .. there is no will .. there are no thoughts .. there is no pill .. U Understand ?

I am saying I believe that the soul comes into existence at the time of conception, BEFORE the moment the entity becomes aware of its own existence.
Obviously there is no ability for the soul to be actualized at that time.

 

[Sargonski]

That is a religious belief, not a claim, thus it is not subject to proof. Catholics also believe that the soul begins at the moment of conception.

I am saying I believe that the soul comes into existence at the time of conception, BEFORE the moment the entity becomes aware of its own existence.
Obviously there is no ability for the soul to be actualized at that time.

WHat is this nonsense .. "not subject to proof" ?? What on earth are you talking about .. you were asked for some support for your claim .. some rational for your choice .. on the basis of your religious belief definition .. that the soul actualizes the flesh.

You were then told .. and apparently agree .. that the soul has no ability to actualize the flesh until long after the Zygote.

What then is the point of the Soul being there ? and why not at the sperm .. the arrow shooting into the quiver.

The point is that you have no rational explanation .. either religious, scientific, naturalistic .. no logic ... no reason behind the choice .. of any kind ..

Don't blame religious belief on your inability to support this claim -- as it is the question is in keeping with your stated religious belief .. on which we have perfect agreement. There is no religious support of any kind for this "Soul arrives at conception" .. "Cause the Pope Said So" silliness.

Popes - Pontifex Maximus .. suposedly .. you know what means right ? PM ? -- usurping the positon of The Logos .. emmisary between man ands God .. the ultimate heresy and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit that trick .. Let that not be your guide to religious belief friend .. The band of morons that put out all kinds of wing bat edicts over the years .. shown false or just stupid in recent times .. requiring and receiving much apology.. Cat's once coming under the evil eye of the Papacy .. setting off a rash of cat killing and torture throughout the land .. something to do with being the devil's pet or some such idiocy .. the norm from out of the blasphemous Papacy.

Now .. let us turn off the faith .. and turn on the brain matter .. and come up with some support .. anything .. religious .. scientific .. philosophical .. Anything .. and tell me if that if you belief God is your creator .. and you were given brain for purpose .. do you not think that purpose might be put to good use right now .. on this significant question of when the Soul Arrives !?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

It is not a guess. It is a faith-based belief.

What's the difference? Faith-based beliefs are chosen without sufficient supporting evidence to justify believe in them, which is what makes them faith-based beliefs. I use the word justify in the academic sense as in the sciences and law that the belief be a sound conclusion to be called justified.